Full text of "History Of Early Iran"

See other formats

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS, CHICAGO 

THE BAKER & TAYLOR COMPANY, NEW YORK; THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY 
PRESS, LONDON; THE MARUZEN-KABUSHIKI-KAISHA, T<fKYO, OSAKA, 
KYOTO, FUKUOKA, SENDAI; THE COMMERCIAL PRESS, LIMITED, SHANGHAI 



HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


BY GEORGE G. CAMERON 


IKSTRUCTOR IX ORIENTAL LANGUAGES 
THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO 



THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS 


CHICAGO • ILLINOIS 



COPVRIOHT 1936 BV THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO 

all rights reserved, published march 1936 

COMPOSED and printed BY THL UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS, CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, U.S,\. 



TO MY WIFE 




PREFACE 


H istories of Iran regularly begin with 
Cyrus the Persian and generally conclude 
with Alexander the Great. At present there 
is no single work which describes in a comprehensive 
fashion the history of the Iranian plateau before Cyrus 
attained mastery. This is the more regrettable since 
the history of a section of the plateau, Elam, ^.annot 
be neglected by any serious student of the ancient 
Near East. The present study endeavors to present 
the facts about early Elamite and Iranian history in 
a manner which will be at the same time useful to the 
scholar and intelligible to the layman. 

Some years ago the wTiter became interested in the 
origin and history of the Iranian Medes. x-lfter a brief 
period of research it became obvious that the empire 
of the Medes fitted into a wider historical perspective 
than hitherto assumed, and that Median as well as 
Persian origins could not be disassociated from the 
history of the Iranian plateau before Iranians ap- 
peared on the scene. The attempt to unravel the 
mystery of that broader history led naturally to an 
examination of the languages which were first, to our 
knowledge, spoken in that land. Since the Old 
Persian kings had composed their inscriptions in three 



PREFACE 


viii 

languages — Old Persian, Babylonian, and £lamite — 
the first step was the preparation of a concordance of 
Old Persian words. Through an intimate knowledge 
of this language and by a comparison with the Ak- 
kadian, late Elamite could be made intelligible. Next 
followed the compilation of an Elamite dictionary 
which included every published text. Finally, the 
pertinent data from the Land of the Two Rivers were 
scrutinized for information, previously overlooked or 
disregarded, which might illuminate the picture. 

The writer cannot claim full satisfaction with the 
results obtained. Until recent years there have been 
few excavations in Iran, and the scarcity of archeo- 
logical investigations has greatly hampered historical 
understanding. The researches undertaken in the tell 
of Susa in Elam have been remarkably productive, 
and there is little question but that other and even 
more attractive sites on the plateau will add ma- 
terially to our knowledge. Until archeology has as- 
sumed a larger share of the burden, much of the his- 
tory of greater Iran must lie buried in the tells and 
ruined city-mounds which dot the country. It is, 
however, safe to say that future investigations will 
and must be fitted into the historical picture to the 
degree that they tie their results into the history of 
Elam. The chronology of Elamite history is now, we 
may assume, assured within close limits, and will pro- 
vide a solid foundation for all subsequent history of 
the plateau, until the first millennium b.c. 



PREFACE 


IX 


This work in its inception was inspired by Profes- 
sor Albert Ten Eyck Olmstead, Oriental Institute 
Professor of Oriental History in the University of 
Chicago. From what seemed at times an inex- 
haustible store of knov/ledge, he has often pieced 
together the scattered threads of historical data into 
a perfect whole. From his unrivaled ability to see 
each isolated fact in its relationship to the entire pic- 
ture he has given to this study a perspective it could 
never otherwise have achieved. From his unpub- 
lished notes and manuscripts^ and, more than these, 
from his discussions, criticisms, and suggestio^is at 
every stage of the progress, I have obtained more than 
words can say. Front him I have secured encourage- 
ment in hours of perplexity; his aid, given imstinting- 
ly, has enormously lightened my labors. 

Professor Arno Poebel and Professor F. W. Geers 
have often confided to me, as student and friend, 
their opinions on historical questions and their im- 
proved translations of historical documents. Profes- 
sor Geers and Dr. L J, Gelb have done me the great 
service of reading the manuscript and offering their 
suggestions. The unwavering enthusiasm and vitality 
of Professor M. Sprengling have often heartened me 
in moments of despair. Other members of the Orien- 
tal Institute staff and of the Department of Oriental 
Languages and Literatures have been no less kind. 
To the Oriental Institute and its director, Professor 
James H. Breasted, as well as to the University of 



X 


PREFACE 


Chicago Press, I owe my thanks for making possible 
the adequate publication of results. Dr. T. G. Allen, 
associate editor of the Institute’s publications, has 
my sincere thanks for his careful editing. Beyond all 
these is the contribution acknowledged by the dedica- 
tion. 

George G. Cameron 

University of Chicago 
October i, 1935 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 


PAGE 

Abbreviations xiii 

CHAPTER 

I. The Land and Its People i 

IL Historical Beginnings 2.2 

IIL Babylonian Dynasts and Kings of Simash . . 43 

IV. Divine Messengers of Elam, Simash, and Susa . 67 

p 

V, The Kassite Interlude 89 

VI. Kings of Anzan and Susa 96 

VII. The Glory of an Elamite Empire 113 

VIII. Indo-Iranians in the Zagros Mountains . . . 138 

IX. A New Elamite Kingdom 156 

X. Median and Persian Chieftains 170 

XL The Eclipse of Elam 185 

XII. Medes and Persians 212 

Tables 228 

Index 233 

Map at end 


xi 




ABBREVIATIONS 


AJSL 

AMI 

AOF 

BA 

Barton, RISA 


BE 


CT 


Harper, ABL 


Hiising, ^ueikn 


American Journal of Semitic Languages and 
Literatures (Chicago, etc., 1884 ). 

Archaologische Mitteilungen aus Iran (Ber- 
lin, 1929 ). 

Archiv fiir Orientforschung. Band III 

(Berlin, 1926 ). 

Beitrage zur Assyriologie und semitischen 
Sprachwissenschaft (Leipzig, 1890—^ — ). 

Barton, G. The Royal Inscriptions of 
Sumer and Akkad (New Haven, Conn., 
1929). 

Pennsylvania. University. The Babylonian 
Expedition. Ser. A: Cuneiform Texts. 
Ser. D: Researches and Treatises. Ed. 
by H. V. Hilprecht (Philadelphia, 

1893 — )• 

Cuneiform Texts from Babylonian Tablets, 
etc,, in the British Museum (London, 
1896 ). 

Harper, Robert Francis. Assyrian and 
Babylonian Letters Belonging to the 
Kouyunjik Collections of the British Mu- 
seum (14 vols.; London, 1892-1914). 

HiisiNG, Georg. Die einheimischen Quellen 
zur Geschichte Elams, i. Teil. Altelam- 
ische Texte (Leipzig, 1916). 
xiii 



XIV 


ABBREVIATIONS 


yjos 

JRAS 

KB 

Klauber, Texte 

Knudtzonj Gebete 

Konig, Alteste 
Geschichte 

Konig, Geschichte 
Elams 

EAR 

MAOG 

Mem, 


American Oriental Society. Journal (Boston, 
etc., 1849 )• 

Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain 
and Ireland, London. Journal (London, 
1834 ). 

Keilinschriftiiche Bibliothek, hrsg. von Eber- 
HARD Schrader (6 vols.; Berlin, 1889- 
1915). 

Politisch-religiose Texte aus der Sargo- 
nidenzeit, hrsg. von E. G. Klauber (Leip- 
zig, 19^3)- 

Assyrische Gebete an den Sonnengott fur 
Staat und konigliches Haus aus der Zeit 
Asarhaddons und Asurbanipals, hrsg. von 
J. A. Knudtzon (Leipzig, 1893). 

Konig, F. W. Alteste Geschichte der Meder 
und Perser (Der Alte Orient, Band 
XXXIII, Heft 3/4 [Leipzig, 1934]). 

Konig, F. W. Geschichte Elams (Der Alte 
Orient, Band XXIX, Heft 4 [Leipzig, 

1931])* 

Luckenbill, D. D. Ancient Records of i\s- 
syria and Babylonia (2 vols.; Chicago, 
1926-27). 

Aitorientalische Gesellschaft, Berlin. Mit- 
teilungen (Leipzig, 1925 ). 

France. D6iegation en Perse. Memoires. 
Tome I-XIII (Paris, 1900-19 12). 

France. Mission archeologique de Susiane. 
Memoires. Tome XIV (Paris, 1913). 

France. Mission archeologique de Perse, 
Publications. Tome XV (Paris, 1914). 



ABBREVIATIONS 


XV 


France. Mission archeologique de Perse. 
IMemoires. Tome XVI~XXV (Paris, 1921- 
34 ). 

MFAG Vorderasiatisch-aegyptische Gesellschaft, 

Berlin, Mitteiiungen (Berlin, 1896-1908; 
Leipzig, 1909 ). 

QIC Chicago, University. The Oriental Institute. 

Oriental Institute Communications (Chi- 
cago, 1922 ). 

OIP Chicago. University. The Oriental Institute. 

Oriental Institute Publications (Chicago, 
1924 — ). 

OLZ Orientalistische Literaturzeitung (Berlin, 

1898-1908; Leipzig, 1909 ). 

PBS Pennsylvania. University. University Mu- 

seum. Publications of the Babylonian Sec- 
tion (Philadelphia, 1911 ). 

Piepkorn, A shut- Piepkorn, A. C. Historical Prism Inscrip- 
hanipal^ I tions of Ashurbanipal. I (Chicago. Uni- 

versity. The Oriental Institute. Assyrio- 
logicai Studies, No. 5 [Chicago, 1933]). 

Prasek, Geschichte Prasek, J. V. Geschichte der Meder und 
Perser (2 vols.; Gotha, 1906-10). 

PSBA Society of Biblical i^rchaeology, London. 

Proceedings (London, 1879-1918). 

RA Revue d’assyriologie et d’archeologie orien- 

tale (Paris, 1884 ). 

RT Recueii de travaux relatifs a la philologie et 

a Farcheologie egyptiennes et assyriennes 
(40 vols.; Paris, 1870-1923). 



xvi 

SJK 

SJOC 

Waterman, RCAE 

JVZKM 

ZA 

ZDMG 


ABBREVIATIONS 

Thureau-Dangin, Fr. Die sumerischen und 
akkadischen Konigsinschriften (Vorder- 
asiatische Bibiiothek, i. Stiick [Leipzig, 
1907]). 

Chicago. University. The Oriental Insti- 
tute. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civiliza- 
tion (Chicago, 1931 ). 

Waterman, Leroy. Royal Correspondence 
of the Assyrian Empire (University of 
Michigan Studies, Humanistic Series, 
Vols. XVII-XIX; Ann Arbor, 1930-31). 

Wiener Zeitschrift fur die Kunde des Mor- 
genlandes (Wien, 1887 ). 

Zeitschrift fur Assyriologie und verwandte 
Gebiete (Leipzig, 1886 ). 

Deutsche morgenlandische Gesellschaft. 
Zeitschrift (Leipzig, 1847 )• 



CHAPTER I 

THE LAND AND ITS PEOPLE 


I RAN, a plateau with numerous large depressions, 
is cradled between two mountain ranges sweep- 
ing majestically from the knotted heights of 
Armenia north of the Fertile Crescent. One wing, a 
lofty ridge known as the Elburz, advances eastward 
along the south of the Caspian, where it reaches its 
climax in the towering peak of the Demavend. ‘Con- 
tinuing eastward, it dwindles away in the steppes 
of Khurasan, where it meets the line of the Hindu 
Kush coming from the opposite direction, from the 
Pamirs, the 'hoof of the world.’’ The second wing, 
called the Zagros ranges, curves gently southeast- 
ward, then still more south. In numerous parallel 
folds it skirts the eastern edge of fertile Babylonia, 
forms a glittering and almost impassable barrier on 
the eastern shore of the Persian Gulf, and, after ad- 
vancing over the desolate regions along the Indiaij 
Ocean, turns sharply northward through Baluchistan 
and Afghanistan to join other mountains spreading, 
like the Hindu Kush, fanlike from the Pamirs. 

These mountain ranges on either side of the plateau 
have been from time immemorial Iran’s strength — 
and weakness. From them came treasured metals and 



HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


stones^ gold and silver^ lead and copper^ lapis lazuli 
and carnelian. From them also^ thrust up in the wake 
of the volcanic activity of late Pliocene times, came 
diorite and obsidian, both highly prized in antiquity. 
Finally, the rivers of Iran, racing swiftly through 
tremendous defiles from the heights to level land, 
brought fertility to many thousand square miles of 
barren soil, and desolation to other thousands. Silt 
carried by these streams during the glacial or pluvial 
periods was deposited in an inner basin and covered 
with water which evaporated as the winds swept to- 
gether the sandy gravel. Thus, what was once a 
mighty sea became only sandy wastes and salt des- 
erts. By far the greater portion of Iran is desert 
throughout the year, while, as summer advances, 
large tracts which in the spring were green are burned 
up and the whole plateau becomes dry and parched. 

Judged on this basis, the land might truly be 
thought forbidding and uninviting to foreigners. 
Nevertheless, it is the connecting link between the 
Far East and the Near East. Migratory movements 
and warriors’ campaigns have frequently swept across 
jts borders in historic times, and these surely began in 
the dark past of prehistory. Consequently, the routes 
which lead without great difficulty into the land are 
worthy of special consideration. 

Two passes across the Caucasus lead through 
Armenia into Anatolia, but a third permits entry to 
the coastal region south of the Caspian or to the 



THE LAND AND ITS PEOPLE 3 

mountain valleys of the Zagros. This was the route 
followed, for example, by some of the Scythians in 
the seventh century before our era, when they pene- 
trated into Media and Persia and for a time threat- 
ened to upset the political arrangement of Western 

xAsia. 

On the part of the dwellers in Mesopotamia, there 
was a constant need to hold in check the highlanders 
from the Zagros Mountains and the Iranian plateau 
and to maintain an open trade route with the east. 
Accordingly, warriors of the lowlands succeeded from 
time to time in following a few of the arduous paths 
across the Zagros; then as now, however, for conquest 
or for commerce, the most frequently traveled route 
was the Baghdad-Kirmanshah-Hamadan trail. It 
seemed an irony of fate that this path, favored by the 
Assyrians, was used by their enemies, the Medes, 
when they descended from the highlands and subdued 
the worshipers of xAshur. 

On the northeastern frontier, in spite of numerous 
parallel mountain ranges, entrance to Iran is com- 
paratively unobstructed. Across this frontier, to and 
from Turkestan and Central xAsia, roamed Mous- 
terian man; and the Indo-Iranian peoples who 
swarmed over it in the second millennium b.c. ulti- 
mately brought into being the first of the Indo- 
Iranian empires, namely, the kingdoms of the Medes 
and the Persians. In contrast with this frontier the 
eastern and southeastern borders are almost im- 



4 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


It 

passable; yet cultural relationships between Iran and 
India even in prehistoric times can be pointed out^ 
and Darius the Persian controlled the Indus Valley 
and the Punjab for a time. 

The southern border of Iran faces so abruptly on 
the Indian Ocean that inhabitants of this region are 
denied the enjoyment of maritime pursuits. North- 
west of this district the mountain ranges which are a 
continuation of the Zagros chain trend with remark- 
able regularity from northwest to southeast. These 
ranges are separated by regular valleys and inter- 
sected by enormous defiles, so that passage is diffi- 
cult and commerce seriously impaired. 

One district alone in this region gave easy access 
to the plateau of Iran itself, to the Persian Gulf, and 
to the fertile and early civilized Babylonia. This dis- 
trict, the plain of Susa, geographically bade fair to 
be called a part of Babylonia. However, an encircling 
arm of the Zagros, added to the marshes which in 
early days surrounded the head of the Persian Gulf, 
protected this level basin. In the north and north- 
east other snow-topped ranges of the Zagros furnished 
abundant water for several rivers which irrigated the 
land. Two of these approach each other at right 
angles in the center of the plain. When but a few 
miles apart they again recede, the Karkhah turning 
southwest toward Babylonia, the river Diz flow- 
ing southeast into a third river, the Karun. At the 
point where the Karkhah and Diz most nearly ap- 



THE LAND AND ITS PEOPLE 


proach^ th*ere grew up in antiquity a city to be famous 
in Babylonian as in Elamite and Iranian history — 
Susa. This cit}q today but a ‘Tell/’ still speaks elo- 
quently of its one-time grandeur. It measures almost 
3poo feet on a side^ and its highest point is well over 
120 feet above the surrounding plain. Since the win- 
ter of 1897 the ]\Iinistere de Finstructioii publique et 
des beaiix-arts, by authority of the French govern- 
ment, has excavated at this site; and each year has 
seen some striking revelation of the history of the 
ancient Orient or some beautiful addition to the 
magnificent collection in the Louvre. Though jnuch 
still remains to be excavated, we must emphasize the 
fact that Susa alone, in her fertile lowland, can never 
reveal the deeper secrets of Elamite history. For the 
Elamites were primarily highlanders, and during 
many periods of their history Susa played but a 
minor part, while a leading character in the drama 
was Anshan, not yet certainly located. Doubtless one 
reason for this relative political unimportance was the 
climate of the Susa basin. During nine months of the 
year the whole plain is burned up by the sun’s heat, 
whose intensity affords some credence to Strabo’s tale 
that lizards and serpents could not crawl across the 
streets at midday without being burned. Susa must 
nevertheless provide most of our available material 
for a political history of early Iran, since no other 
Elamite site has been excavated. 

Iran, as thus described, gave little geographical 



6 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


promise of great things to come in history. It was 
far more suited to “food-gatherers” than to “food- 
producers,” for it was a land adapted to the grazing 
of animals rather than to the tilling of the soil. 
Nevertheless, its influence goes back to prehistory, 
and this influence demands present consideration. 

Flint implements of Middle Paleolithic types have 
been found in central Iran, northeast of modern 
Shiraz, near the shores of what may have been a large 
sweet-water lake in those times. It has been sug- 
gested that Paleolithic man passed through the val- 
leys of southern Iran in a general northwesterly direc- 
tion and entered Kurdistan through the gorges at 
Sulaimaniyah, Rowandiz, and points north.^ Arti- 
facts of Mousterian man, very similar to others dis- 
covered in Palestine, have been found in caves near 
Sulaimaniyah.^" Although the evidence is incomplete, 
it is sufficient to suggest that occupation of the caves 
was contemporaneous with the last glacial advance. 
It can be only an accident that other Mousterian 
implements have not been reported from diverse sites 
in Iran, for they have been discovered throughout all 
Europe in the west, through Africa, Palestine, India, 
even to Manchuria. Aurignacian man, successor to 
the declining Mousterian, seems also to have found a 
home in the Zagros, as he did in other parts of the 

^ Henry Field in AJSL^ LI (1934/35), 208 f. 

^ D. k. E. Garrod, ‘‘The Palaeolithic of Southern Kurdistan,” Bulletin 
of ike American School of Brehistoric Research, No. 6 (March, 1930). 



THE LAND AND ITS PEOPLE 


ancient Qrient. There is no evidence, however, for 
other types of flints of Paleolithic manufacture. 

It is possible that Iran passed through the Neo- 
lithic stage of development, although it is not until 
the very latest subperiod, the so-called “Chalco- 
lithic,” when copper was being introduced for orna- 
ments, that we can obtain clarity of vision. Professor 
Herzfeld recently announced the discovery of a vil- 
lage near Persepolis which must be assigned to this 
stage of man’s development.^ The village, with its 
single-story mud-brick dwellings on either side of a 
narrow street, remains today almost as early Chalco- 
lithic man left it millenniums ago. His stone Imple- 
ments and stone bowls are a lasting memento of his 
life at this site; and his wheelmade pottery, carefully 
fashioned and magnificently painted, is a permanent 
tribute to his craftsmanship. Two ornaments of cop- 
per, presumably hammered, are trifles among the 
thousands of stone objects; but they show that this 
man lived at the very dawn of the Metal Age. 

While Europe was still in the later stages of Paleo- 
lithic culture, Iran, like the rest of the Near East, 
advanced rapidly into the Copper xAge. Man, having 
made the acquaintance of metals, used them freely in 
his everyday life, although stone implements were 
still widely employed. At the same time he began to 
domesticate plants and animals. At Jemdet Nasr in 

3 E. Herzfeld in the Illustrated London Ne-Jis, May aj, 1929, pp. 892 f., 
and Iranische Denkmdler, Lfgn. i and 2 (Berlin, 1932), pp. 3-18, Pis. 1-30. 



HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Babylonia the excavators found kernels of true wheat 
and six-rowed barley/ a discovery equaling that of 
wheat and barley chaff in the lowest stratum of Anau, 
just beyond the northeastern border of Iran in 
Russian Turkestan.^ Wild emmer^ long considered 
the ancestor of cultivated wheat, has been revealed 
near the city of Karind on the Baghdad-Kirmanshah 
road in the Zagros Mountains.^ Sheep and long- 
horned cattle are portrayed on sherds of painted 
pottery from every section of Iran. This ware, the 
most notable contribution of Copper Age man, was a 
direct descendant of the Iranian early Chalcolithic 
painted pottery. It appears at Susa, where it is 
known as Susa I,^ and, in successively later develop- 
ments, at Nihavend^ and Kirmanshah^ in the Zagros; 
at Bushire in the south near the cities of Teheran,” 

^ H. Field in the American Anthropologist^ XXXIV (1932), 303-9. - 

s Pumpelly, Explorations in Turkestan^ Expedition of igo^ (Washing- 
ton, D.C., 1908), pp. 38 f., 67, and 72; cf. Schellenberg, ibid.y pp. 469-73, 

^ A. Schulz in Berichte der deutschen botanischen Gesellschaft, XXXI 
(1913), 226-30, and Die Geschichte der kultivierten Getreide (Haile, 1913), 
pp. 13 L 

7 De Morgan, Mem,, I, 184-88; De Morgan, Pettier, and De Mec- 
quenem, Mem., Vol. XIIL 

^Herzfeld in the Illustrated London News, June i, 1929, pp. 942-45; 
AMI, I (1929-30), 65-71; Iranische Denkmaler, Lfg. 3/4 (Berlin, 1933), 
pp. 19-26, Pis. 1-27. See also Contenau and Ghirshman in Syria, XIV 
(i933)> MI- 

^ De Mecquenem, Mem., XX, 126 f. 

Pezard, Mem., XV, 13-19. 

” De Mecquenem, Mem., XX, 115-25. 



THE LAND AND ITS PEOPLE 


9 


Shiraz/^ and Kashan^^ in the central part of the 
plateau; and in Seistan^*^ and Baluchistan"^ in the east. 

All the available evidence indicates that the 
painted-pottery culture persisted steadfastly within 
Iran while Mesopotamia was undergoing a gradual 
and distinct evolution. Susa alone on the border of 
the plateau felt the impact of the development on the 
wesL and recent excavations have revealed the 
presence at this site of the typically Mesopotamian 
wares. Thus superimposed upon the pottery of Susa 
I are sherds w’hich belong to the earliest period of 
Mesopotamian archeology, namely, the aL'Ubaid 
period; and above these again are fragments which 
can be assigned in turn to the Uruk and to the 
Jemdet Nasr periods."^ One group of pottery vases 
does not, how^ever, belong with the Mesopotamian 
objects but has its closest parallels in far-off Seistan 
and Baluchistan."" This is the generally monochrome 

” H. Field in AJSL^ LI (1934/35), 208. 

^3 A. U. Pope in the Illustrated London News, December 15, 1934, p. 
1005; R. Ghirshman, ibid., March 16, 1935, pp. 416 f. 

^•5 Aurei Stein, An Archaeological Tour in Gedrosia, “Memoirs of the 
Archaeological Survey of India,” No. 43 (Calcutta, 1931); Innermost 
Asia (Oxford, 1928}, 11 , 949-58, and VoL III, Pis. 113 f.; “The Indo- 
Iranian Borderlands” (Huxley Memorial Lecture for 1934), Journal of 
the Royal Anthropological Institute, LXIV (1934}, 179-202. 

Aurei Stein, An Archaeological Tour in Waziristdn and Northern 
Baluchistan, “Memoirs of the Archaeological Survey of India,” No. 37 
(Calcutta, 1929). 

De Mecquenem, Mem., XX, 99-112 and 128-32. 

^7 With some of the pottery published by Aurei Stein in “Memoirs of 
the Archaeological Survey of India,” Nos. 37 and 43. 



lO 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


pottery known as Susa II; although it may be con- 
temporary with Jemdet Nasr wares, its occurrence 
has unfortunately never been stratigraphically de- 
termined. It has recently been suggested that Susa 
II represents an intrusion of a peculiar phase of the 
late Iranian painted-pottery culture,"® but nothing 
definite can be asserted at present. 

We are doubly unfortunate in lacking a precise 
dating for the ware, since the earliest writing on clay 
tablets in Elam was contemporary with its manu- 
facture."® In Mesopotamia clay tablets have been 
discovered in strata which belong to the Uruk period;^” 
by the Jemdet Nasr period tablets with pictographic 
inscriptions show words and names that are indubi- 
tably Sumerian. The signs are no longer linear; and 
the primary numerical system, perhaps of these texts 
and certainly of the Sumerian, is sexagesimal.^" Our 
Susa documents,^^ as well as those from central Iran,^^ 

H. Frankfort, Archeology and the Sumerian Problem (SAOC, No. 4 
[1932]), pp. 65-72. 

De Mecquenem, Mem,, XXV, 189-91 and 205. 

See now A. Noldeke, E. Heinrich, and E. Schott, “Fiinfter voriau- 
%er Bericht iiber die von der Notgemeinschaft der deutschen Wissen- 
schaft in Uruk unternommenen Ausgrabungen,” Abhandlungen der 
Preussischen Akademie der W is sens chajten, phil.-hist. Klasse, 1933, No. 5, 
esp. pp. 9 and 14. 

Langdon, Pictographic Inscriptions from Jemdet Nasr (“Oxford Edi- 
tions of Cuneiform Texts,” VoL VII [Oxford, 1928]); cf. Meissner in 
A OF, VI ( 1 930-3 1 ) , 303 f. 

Scheil, Mim., VI, 59 fF., and VoL XVII. 

*3 Ghirshman, “Une tablette proto-elamite du plateau iranien,” RA, 
XXXI (1934), II 5 -I 9 - 



THE Lx^ND AND ITS PEOPLE 


II 


are written in what is commonly known as proto- 
Elamite and are comparable with those from Baby- 
lonia in shape only. The signs retain the linear design 
and are seemingly to be read as pure ideographs. The 
numerical system appears to be decimaL^-^ A common 
origin for the two scripts is possible; nevertheless^ it 
is also conceivable that proto-Elamite was independ- 
ent. Eventually the inhabitants of Elam adopted the 
Sumerian script and employed it to write their own 
language. Period by period their signs followed those 
in current use in Babylonia; judged on this basis^^ an 
inscription from the island Bushire, known as Liyan 
to the Elamites, in the Persian Gulf shows 
that Sumerian script was already in use for Elamite 
at a period somewhat antecedent to that of Sargon 
of flgade and hints at a widespread culture, if not 
empire.^^ Thereafter, particularly in the twelfth cen- 
tury B.C., numerous inscriptions reveal the main es- 
sentials of the Elamite language.^^ 

To clarify these main essentials, and thereby to 
make possible a more accurate translation of the 

For discussions of the proto-Elamite texts see Scheii, ioc, cil.; Weid- 
ner, JOFj III (1926), 84 ; Langdon in JEuiS^ PP* i 69 ~ 73 - 

Francois Lenormant, Choix de textes cunelformes (Paris, 1873), p. 127, 
No. 41 ; cf. Hiising, ^uellen^ No. i. 

For discussions on Elamite phonetics and grammar see F. Bork, 
“Elam. B. Sprache/’ Realkxikon der VorgescMchte, III (1925), 70-83, 
with the bibliography there cited; R. Bleichsteiner, “Beitrage zur Kennt- 
nis der elamischen Sprache,” Anthropos^ XXIII (1928), 167-98; Th, 
Kluge, “Das Elamische,'’ Le Museon^ XLVI (1933), 111-56; Bork, 
“Elamische Studien,” MAOG^ VII, Heft 3 (1933), 3“3i- 



12 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Elamite texts for historical purposes, the writer un- 
dertook some years ago the compilation of an Elamite 
dictionary. The facilities furnished by the great As- 
syrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute were at his 
disposal; and his dictionary, since completed, in the 
manner of its i\ssyrian predecessor permits the 
examination and comparison of every word in the 
published Elamite inscriptions with full context. 
Without the revised translations made possible by 
the dictionary, this history could never have been 
prepared, nor would many important details of Elam- 
ite grammatical structure have become clear. Only 
the essential features of the Elamite language need, 
however, be indicated in this study. 

In matters of phonology there is marked disagree- 
ment between the spoken word and the written script. 
The Elamites rarely made clear distinction in writing 
between voiced and voiceless consonants; their b and 
py d and /, g and and z and s were seldom differ- 
entiated.^'^ Individual vowels were frequently nasal- 
ized in the spoken language, but in the written word 
an overhanging tiy or ng was often omitted. 
Further, the cuneiform script made no provision for 
a few of the sounds which could be heard in the 
spoken language; thus, for example, a sound variously 
heard as /, /, or It led to diverse methods of spelling 

=^7 Thus arose such dual forms as kudur and kuiur or kutir^ as in Kudur- 
Nahhunte; Lagamar and Lakamar, the name of a deity; Anzan and 
Anshan, the name of a land. Throughout this work, attempt has been 



THE LAXD AND ITS PEOPLE 


^3 


the native name for Elam^ Haltamti^ by the Elamites 
themselves. 

As in English^ the noun does not distinguish be- 
tween masculine and feminine, though the diiTerence 
betv/een person and thing, as ''king” and "kingdom,” 
is usually marked. One remarkable characteristic of 
the language is a double genitive construction in 
which the suffix of a noun is repeated at the close of 
the genitival phrase, together with all its modifying 
elements. Thus such a phrase as "in the temple of 
Shimutta, the god of Elam,” is expressed in this order: 
"temple, Shimutta, the god, Elam, of, of, in.” 

The verbal forms are by far the most troublesome 
elements. In addition to the fact that the root mean- 
ing of the verb has often been unknown, failure to 
identify a subordinate verb as such, even wffien the 
root meaning of the verb was clear, frequently has 
led students of the language to an impossible transla- 
tion or to a hopeless impasse. Fortunately, the sub- 
ordinate verb is, almost without exception, clearly 
recognizable; our main problem now is a more accu- 
rate definition of the meanings of the verbal roots. 

Many of the elements characteristic of Elamite seem 
common to those of a linguistic group found today in 
the Caucasus area only and referred to as the "Cau- 
casian” family of languages, although certain phonet- 
ic and grammatical parallels with the Tamil dialect 
of Dravidian in southern India have been noted.^^ 

Cf. G. W. Brown, ‘‘The Possibility of a Connection betw'een Mitanni 
and the Dravidian Languages,'' JAOSy L (1930), -73-305, 



14 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Many of these elements seem to have ancient counter- 
parts in the languages spoken by the Kassites/’ the 
Luliubi,^'’ and the Guti^^ in the central Zagros; by the 
Haldians in the mountains of Armenia;^^ by the 
Hurrians in the great bend of the Euphrates by a 
few peoples of Asia Minor, such as the Protohattians^'* 


Friedrich Delitzsch, Die Sprache der Kossder (Leipzig, 1884); T. G. 
Pinches, “The Language of the Kassites/’ JRAS^ I9I7 j PP- 101-14. 

Cf. E. K. Speiser, Mesopotamian Origins (Philadelphia, 1930), 
pp. 88-96. 

Ihid,^ pp. 96-119. 

32 A. H. Sayce, “The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Van, Deciphered and 
Translated,” JRAS^ 1 882, pp. 377-732; Tseretheli, “Die neuen iialdischen 
Inschriften Konig Sardurs von Urartu,” Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger 
Akademie der Wissenschaften*^ phil.-hist. Klasse, Vol. XVIII (1927/28), 
No. 5; J. Friedrich, “Beitrage zu Grammatik und Lexikon des Chaldi- 
schen,” Caucasica^ VII (1931), 53“86, and VIII (1931), 114-50; “Zur 
urartaischen Nominalflexion,” ZA^ XL (1931), 264-88; cf. also Th. 
Kluge, “Die Sprache der urartaischen Inschriften und ihre Steilung im 
kaukasischen Sprachenkreise,” MVAG^ XII, Heft 5 (1907), 176-224. 

33 L. Messerschmidt, “Mitanni-Studien,” MFAG, IV, Heft 4 (1899), 
175-308; Bork, “Die Mitannisprache,” MVAG, XIV, Heft 1/2 (1909), 
1-126; A. Gustavs, “Verbindungs-Linien zwischen dem Mitannischen, 
dem Elamischen, und dem Lykischen,” Memnon^ VII (1915), 228-32; 
A. Gustavs, “Mitanni. B, Sprache,” Reallexikon der Vorgeschichte, VIII 
(1926), 218-26; E. Forrer, “Die Inschriften und Sprachen des |Iatti- 
Reiches,” ZDMG, LXXVI (1922), 224-28; Bork, “Studien zum Mitani,” 
AOF, VIII (1932/33), 308-14. 

3 -t Forrer, “Die acht Sprachen der Boghazkoi-Inschriften,” Sitzungs- 
berichte der Preussischen Akademie der Wis sens chaf ten ^ phil.-hist. Klasse, 
^ 9 ^ 9 ) PP* ^032-34, and “Die Inschriften und Sprachen des IJatti- 
Reiches,” ZDMG^ LXXVI (1922), 228-41; Bleichsteiner, “Zum Proto- 
chattischen,” Berichte des Forschungs-Institutes fur Osten und Orient, III 
(Wien, 1923), 102-6. 



THE LAND AND ITS PEOPLE 


and the laster Lycians^^ and Lydians;-^^ possibly also 
by the Etruscans in ItalyA^ Such analogues as may 
be found between Elamite and any of these other 
languages naturally point only to linguistic affinities 
and not to a linguistic unity; whth due caution, how- 
ever, they may indicate ethnic relationships. 

For a modern anthropologist it is difficult, if not 
impossible, to imagine that the present-day inhabit- 
ants of Iran could make up a single ethnological 
family. From time immemorial the plateau has been 
subjected to invasion and counter-invasion, for, in 
spite of the difficulties its borders present, it must be 
remembered that Iran is as much a bridge between 
the Far East and the Land of the Two Rivers as is 
Palestine between Asia and Africa. Consequently, 
peoples of highly diverse origin have sheltered them- 
selves under a single linguistic roof in Iran; and the 

3 s Kluge, “Die iykischen Inschriften,” MVAG^ XV, Heft i (1910), 
1-135; Bork, Skizze des Lukiscken (Konigsberg i. Pr., 1926); Deeters, 
“Lykia. VII. Sprache,” Pauly-Wissowa, Real Encyclopddie der classic 
schen Altertumswissenschajt^ XXVI (1927), 2282-91 ; P. Meriggi, “Ober 
einige lykische Pronominal- und Verbalformen,” Indogermanische For- 
schungen^ XLVI (192S), 151-82, and “Beitrage zur iykischen Syntax,’’ 
Kleinasiatische Forechungen, I, Heft 3 (1930), 414-61. 

3 ^ Deeters, “Lydia. Sprache und Schrift,” Pauiy-Wissowa, op. cit., 
'KKVl (1927), 2153-61; W. Brandenstein, “Die Ivdische Sprache,” 
WZKM, XXXVI (1929), 263-304, and XXXVIII (1932), 1-67; “Die 
Nominaiformen des Lydischen,” Caucasua^ IX (1931), 25-40; “Die 
lydische NominaMexion,” ibid.^ X (1932), 67-94. 

37 G. Herbig, “Etrusker. B. Sprache,” Reallexikon der Vorgeschichtey 
III (1925), 13S-47; cf. F. Sommer, “Das lydische und etruskische F- 
Zeichen,” Sitzungsberkhte der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschafien^ 
phil.-hist. Abt., 1930, Heft i, pp. 1-23. 



ID 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


southern part of the land today, as it must have been 
in ancient times, is pronouncedly piebald in an ethnic 
sense. 

The paucity of archeological and anthropological 
data has given rise to innumerable speculations con- 
cerning the people who dwelt in Iran at the dawn of 
written history. Some of these are based on philology 
alone — a dangerous and often misleading guide. 
Others are derived from cultural features and fre- 
quently disregard the effects of borrowing by peoples 
on the outer fringes of a cultural area, or the changes 
resulting when new immigrants adopt the cultural 
advances of indigenous populations. The best we can 
hope is to avoid the more obvious pitfalls while we 
state what appear to be the ascertainable facts. 

Physical anthropologists are certain that Meso- 
potamia was the eastern borderline for Semitic types 
of individuals and that the Semites, whom we know 
as the brown Mediterranean peoples who invaded 
Mesopotamia from Arabia, did not inhabit Iran at an 
early date. When, therefore, the author of the tenth 
chapter of Genesis calls Elam a son of Shem, that is, 
a Semite, he is speaking not in anthropological but in 
geographical and cultural terms. Nor did Nordic 
peoples speaking an Indo-Iranian language dwell in 
Iran in early times; the earliest evidence indicating 
their entry is dated to the beginning of the second 
millennium b.c. and is based on the mention of Indo- 
Iranian deities among Kassite gods. 



THE LAND AND ITS PEOPLE 


17 

There is some evidence leading to the belief that a 
protonegroid population once extended westward 
from India along the shores of the Persian Gulf. Indi- 
viduals of that group seem to be portrayed on seventh 
century b.c. reliefs of an Assyrian king.^® Greek au- 
thors speak of “Ethiopians” in the southeast of the 
land;^^ their modern descendants possess copper 
skins^ straight hair, and round skulls/'’ It is, how- 
ever, safe to say that these peoples never constituted 
an important or a large element in the population. 

So far as it is possible to determine, in ancient 
times there were longheaded races in Iran preceding 
the Nordic peoples. The basis for this belief is found 
in the appearance, in Mesopotamia, of a brown Eur- 
african type of man. Our present evidence concerning 
him is indeed scanty, but seems to suggest a remote 
physical connection with India.-^^ It is possible that 
these longheads themselves were Sumerians, or were 
related to them, for it has been said that one can still 


3* Cf. the upper register of the Ashurbanipal relief in E. Pettier, Les 
Antiquith assyriennes (du Musee du Louvre) (Paris, 1917), PI. 23; for 
details cf, Victor Place, Nhnve et TAssyrie^ Vol. Ill (Paris, 1867), PL 59, 
No. I . Or see H. R. Hall, Babylonian and Assyrian Sculpture in the British 
Museum (Paris and Brussels, 1928), PL XLIV. Finally, cf. the Achae- 
menian reliefs from Susa in M. Dieulafov, Uacropole de Suse (Paris, 
1893), Pis. V and VI. 

3® Herodotus vii. 70; Strabo xv, 1,13, and 24. 

40 Dieuiafoy, Uacropole de Suse^ p. 28. 

Buxton in L. H. Dudley Buxton and D. Talbot Rice, ‘‘Report on 
the Human Remains Found at Kish,’* Journal of the Royal Anthropological 
Institute y LXI (1931), 57-119, esp. pp. 84 if. 



1 8 HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 

trace the ancient Sumerian face eastward among the 
peoples of Afghanistan and Baluchistan, even to the 
valley of the Indus/^ 

The most important element, however, appears to 
have been roundheaded. In the present population 
of the plateau, at least in the eastern portion, there 
is a very striking group of roundheads, who are more 
numerous in the uplands than on the plain. Some 
may be related to the Dravidians of India, in particu- 
lar to the Tamil-speaking peoples, among whom there 
is a marked brachycephalic element. The stature of 
others is often rather tall, with frequently a marked 
correlation between this stature and fairness of skin. 
Such features might argue for an admixture with 
Nordics; but recalling the fairness of some European 
Alpines, we might also conjecture that these present- 
day peoples are the remnant of a proto-Alpine race. 
If the daring suggestions^ that the so-called ''Arme- 
noids’’ originated in Turkestan be accepted, the 
hypothesis that the early inhabitants of Iran were 
primarily of this stock would be strengthened. Philol- 

Sir Arthur Keith in Hall and Woolley, Al-^Ubaid (“Ur Excava- 
tions,” Vol I [Oxford, 1927]), p. 216. On this question cf. H. Frankfort, 
Archeology and the Sumerian Problem {SAOCy No. 4), pp. 40-47. 

43 Cf. Buxton, The Peoples of Asia (New York, 1925), pp. ii2f.; 
W. Z. Ripley, The Races of Europe (New York, 1919), pp. 450 f.; R. B. 
Dixon, The Racial History of Man (New York, 1923), pp. 309-12. 

44 Cf. Dixon, op. cit.y p. 263. 

45 G. Elliot Smith, Human History (London, 1930), pp. 167 f., and 
The Ancient Egyptians (new and rev. ed.; London, 1923), pp. 102-5; 
Buxton, op. cit., pp. 107-13. 



THE LAND AND ITS PEOPLE 


19 


ogy, dangerous as its evidence may be^ concurs with 
this ''Alpine” theory and tentatively suggests that 
the extension of "Caucasian” linguistic elements from 
far-away India on the east through Elam and the 
Zagros into Anatolia on the ’west is perhaps not with- 
out significance. 

Nevertheless, this view conflicts with the theory al- 
ready stated and commonly held, that the brown 
Eurafrican variety of longheads in Mesopotamia was 
also the chief block of the earliest population in Iran. 
If this be accepted, we must assume, as indeed would 
not be difficult, that the "Caucasian” linguistic affini- 
ties have transcended race and people, being spoken 
both by the supposed original roundheads of Asia 
Minor and by the dolichocephalic peoples of Iran. 

The present state of our knowledge leaves us at a 
complete stalemate. No theory, enticing as it may 
be, is acceptable; only -with the help of physical 
anthropology shall we solve the problem. 

Where we possess written records the social cus- 
toms are much less difficult to describe. Such docu- 
mentation for Iran is found only in Elam and only 
after the twenty-fifth century b.c.; even then w^e 
must read between the lines of a few inscriptions to 
obtain the maximum amount of evidence. 

In Elam, as elsewhere throughout the Orient in 
early times, woman's sphere of activity was not 
limited to the home. Like man, she signed docu- 
ments, carried on business, inherited and willed 



20 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


fortunes, brought suits in the law courts, and owned 
slaves. Her importance increased with the passing 
years. In early Elamite documents we notice the fre- 
quent mention of the ruler’s mother, sister, or 
daughter. The available evidence in the so-called 
“classical” period points to the matrilinear character 
of the royal succession; that is, right to the throne 
was traceable through the mother. Instances of 
brother-sister marriages occur, and presumably this 
was a general practice. It is even* possible that this 
type of marriage practiced by Achaemenian Persian 
kings should be traced back to an Elamite origin, for 
to Aryan minds union of full brother and sister was 
repulsive. 

Peculiarities of the Elamite royal succession will be 
pointed out from time to time as they occur. Particu- 
larly noteworthy is a curious system by which a 
prince in a relatively minor position could advance 
step by step to one of great importance, sometimes 
even to sovereignty. On other occasions the kingship 
descended, not from father to son, but from brother 
to brother. In many parts of the ancient East the 
kings were considered as gods; in Elam not the king 
alone but the entire ruling family was deified. 

Elamite religion was naturally polytheistic in char- 
acter. Unfortunately, some of the divine names were 
written only by means of the Akkadian ideograms. 
This does not mean that the name of the sun-god, 
Shamash in Semitic, for example, was so pronounced 



THE LAND AND ITS PEOPLE 


21 


in Eiam; there his name had doubtless a wholly 
different pronunciatioHj perhaps Nahhunte. T’wo 
deities were all-important in the royal and official 
literature: Huban and Inshushinak. The name of the 
former was often written by means of the Akkadian 
ideogram which proclaimed him 'The Great One/' 
Inshushinak w^as^ quite literally, "the Lord of Susa/'^^ 
Nevertheless, although the rulers might proclaim the 
supremacy of these gods, many passages referring to 
Kiririsha, a form of the mother-goddess, and hun- 
dreds of clay statuettes of this deity found in the 
course of the Susa excavations, bespeak her whom the 
common people of Elam really and sincerely wor- 
shiped. 

Thus briefly we may conclude our survey of the 
land and its prehistory, language, and people. Re- 
strictions of time and space will prevent the presenta- 
tion in the following pages of many subjects which are 
largely cultural in aspect. Much that follows will be 
concerned with names, dates, and synchronisms with 
Babylonian events, for this study is primarily a po- 
litical history. Even thus limited, a history is not 
without value, for to comprehend fully the contribu- 
tions of early man in Iran and in Elam we must first 
understand his relationship to his immediate neigh- 
bors. For that purpose a political history is essential. 

The Elamite name form Inshushinak (also spelled Insushnak and 
Inshushnak) developed from the Sumerian name Nin-shushin-ak. The 
Akkadian form is Shushinak. Cf. Poebel in AJSLy XLIX (1932/33), 136, 
and LI (1934/35), 171. 



CHAPTER II 

HISTORICAL BEGINNINGS 

W HEN Babylonian scribes reduced to written 
word the myths and legends of antiquity, 
they told of the world’s creation, of kings 
enthroned for reigns of fabulous length, and of a 
mighty flood which threatened entirely to depopulate 
the es.rth. They told how kingship, after the waters 
had receded, descended from heaven upon the city 
Kish in northern Babylonia, where ruled a dynasty 
of long-lived sovereigns. Their lists make dry reading, 
for the names of the kings with their lengths of rule 
alone are given. Of the twenty-first ruler of this dy- 
nasty, however, a significant fact is related, a fact 
which to the scribes was the first political event after 
the Flood. Enmenbaragesi, we are informed, subdued 
Elam.^ Eventually the sovereignty of Kish yielded 
to that of Uruk in southern Babylonia, but Elam had 
still to be dealt with. It is reported that Mesken- 
gasher, founder of the new dynasty, descended to the 
sea and ascended the mountain, statements which 
may refer to the Persian Gulf and the Elamite high- 

^ S. Langdon, “Oxford Editions of Cuneiform Texts/* II (Oxford, 

1923)^11. 


22 



HISTORICAL BEGINNINGS 


lands.” Traditions other than those preserved in the 
king lists declared that in the times of Lugalbanda 
and Dumuzi, the third and fourth kings of this dy- 
nasty^ the Elamites invaded Babylonia from their 
mountains.^ With sad hearts the scribes were forced 
to record the fact that considerably later the kingship 
deserted Uruk for Awan, definitelv an Elamite citv. 
For a time a second dynasty at Kish restored the 
sovereignty to Babylonia^ but the succeeding rule in 
the city Hamazi suggests a return of power to the 
highlands north of Elam.-^ Finally, when the kingship 
once more returned to grace the city Kish under the 
ruler Utug, omitted from the scribal lists/ reverbera- 
tions of the struggles betw^een Elamite highlanders 
and Babylonians may be referred to in an inscription 
of Lugal-anne-mundu of Adab, who warred with 
Elam, Marhashi, and Gutium/ 

Ibid,; P. Dhorme in Revue biblique,, XXXV (1926), 72 n., interprets 
the phrase to mean the death of Meskengasher. 

3 A, Poebe!, Historical and Grammatical Texts {PBSy VoL V), No. 20 
rev. 14 ff.; cf. Poebel, Historical Texts {PBS, Vol. IV, Part i), pp. 117 
and 122. 

^ Langdon, op. cii., pp. 13 f.; cf. Poebel, Historical Texts ^ p. 128; E, A. 
Speiser, Mesopotamian Origins (Philadelphia, 1930), pp. 35 f, and 43. 

s H. V. Hilprecht, Old Babylonian Inscriptioyis {BE^ Series A, A'ol. I), 
Part 2, Nos. 108 f.; cf. F. Thureau-Dangin, Die sumerischen und akkadi- 
schen Konigsinsckrijten (Leipzig, 1907; hereafter abbreviated SAK), 
pp. 1 60 f. 

^ Poebel, Historical aiid Grammatical Texts^ No. 75 iii 29 fF., and 
iv 27 ff. See H.-G. Giiterbock in ZA^ XLII (1934), 42 ff. Marhashi (in 
its Akkadian form, Barahshi) is doubdess to be located north of Elam; 
cf. W, F. Albright in JAOS, XLV (1925), 232; Speiser, op. cit.^ P* 31- 



24 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


f; 

So far we have been dealing with legends^ or with 
shadowy figures who stand on the borderline between 
legend and history. Discoveries of recent years have 
transferred several other supposedly legendary char- 
acters to the realm of actual history, and some lucky 
chance may do the same for the individuals men- 
tioned above. For the present we can only quote the 
statements about them as they have come down to 
us, and indicate possible solutions. 

Fortunately for the historian, from this time for- 
ward contemporary royal inscriptions verify and sup- 
plemq.nt the traditions or separate from them the 
actual events. Our most complete records for a short 
time emanate from the Babylonian city-state Lagash, 
where a dynasty was begun by Ur-Nanshe. Although 
the founder brought down objects from the moun- 
tains,'^ he may have had no significant contacts with 
the Elamites. One of his successors, Eannatum, was 
a far more energetic ruler, or so his inscriptions would 
have us believe. These tell us that he vanquished the 
marvelous mountain Elam and heaped up mounds of 
the slain; he defeated the ishakku'sy or princes, of two 
Elamite cities;^ when Elam and all the other coun- 

7 SAK, pp. 2 fF. 

^ The names of these cities are written uru-|-a and uru.az. The former 
is mentioned in Susian documents of the Agade period, Mim.^ Vol. XIV, 
Nos. 19 and 21 ; it is named by Sargon, and together with uru.az appears 
in Third Ur Dynasty texts from Babylonia; see below, pp. 28 and 52 if. 
A city Uruaz appears in documents of the Hammurabi period from Susa, 
Mim,, Vol. XXII, No. 144. 



HISTORICAL BEGINNINGS 


tries revoltedj he drove the Elamite back to his land^ 
which he conquered^ These are great claims. Though 
we may wonder whether the Elamites were not in- 
vaders rather than rebels, there is also proof that the 
wars of Eannatum were not wholly defensive; a sup- 
port for a battle mace brought, doubtless as booty, 
from the first Elamite city to be made subject w^as in- 
scribed in Lagash by Dudu, priest of the city's deity 
Ningirsu.^® Nevertheless, it is certain that Elamite 
raiding parties subsequently penetrated deep into 
Babylonia, for in the time of Enetarzi, third ishakku 
after Eannatum, a band of six hundred Elamites actu- 
ally plundered Lagash.^^ 

The Elamite royal city from which such sorties 
descended into Babylonia was Awan. The Sumerian 
scribes, by recording in their lists a postdiluvian dy- 
nasty in this city, preserved for posterity their knowl- 
edge that throughout the early periods of history 
Awan was pre-eminent in the eastern land. They also 
recognized the fact that Susa at this time was only 
commercially important. We ourselves learn from 
the baked-clay documents found at Susa, written in 
the proto-Elamite language, that this metropolis al- 

SAK, pp. 20 ff. 

E. de Sarzec, Decouvertes eri Chaldee (Paris, 1884-1912), Vol. 11 , 
Pi. 5 hu; cf. SAK^ pp. 34 f. 

“ Thureau-Dangin, “Une incursion elamite en territoire sumerien/' 
RA^ VI (1907), 139-42, now in Barton, RISA^ pp. 66 fF. 



26 HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 

r 

ready had a local history;” but its political fate was 
inextricably bound up with the city Awan, where 
there now {ca. 2670 b.c.) began to rule a dynasty of 
kings, twelve in number/^ 

Peli founded the dynasty; and, if names are to be 
trusted, his immediate successors were all pure Elam- 
ites. To us these rulers — Tata,*'* Ukku-tahesh, Hi- 
shur, Shushun-tarana, Napi-ilhush, and Kikku-sime- 
temti — are no more than names, though we might, 
with some degree of probability, ascribe to one of 
them an inscription since found on Liyan, modern 
Bushire, an island in the Persian Gulf. Fragmentary 
though it is, this text with its archaic signs is yet 
proof that by the time of Sargon of Agade the Elam- 
ites had adopted the Sumerian script to write their 
own language.^^ With the eighth member of the 
dynasty, Luhhi-ishshan, and his successor, Hishep- 

Scheil, Mem.^ VI, 59 ff., and Vol. XVII. For the seal imprints cf. 
L. Legrain, MSm., Vol. XVL 

^3 Scheilj “Dynasties elamites d’Awan et de Simas,” RA^ XXVIII 
(1931), 1-8, now definitive in Mem.y XXIII, iv. In an old Hurrian text 
discovered at Boghazkoy a certain Autalummash is named as a king of 
kings of Elam preceding Manishtusu; cf. E. Forrer, Die Boghazkdi-Texte 
in Umsckrifi, Band 11 , Heft 2 (“Wissenschaftliche VerofFentiichungen der 
Deutschen Orient-Geselischaft,” Band XLII, Heft 2 [Leipzig, 1926]), 25*, 
now in Brandenstein, Keilschrifturkunden aus Boghazkoi^ Vol. XXVIII 
(Berlin, 1934), No. 38 iv 8 ff. From our present data we are unable to 
verify or to deny the truth of this statement. 

The last signs of the names Peli and Tata are doubtful. 

Text from the papers of L. K. Tavernier, published by Frangois 
Lenormant, Choix de textes cuneijormes, p. 127, No. 41; cf. Hiising, 
^ueiien, No. i. 



HISTORICAL BEGINNINGS 


ratep, we step for the first time into the full light of 
history^ for they were contemporary with one of the 
most colorful figures of ancient times^ Sargon^ king 
of Agade {ca, 2530-2475 b.c.). 

Shortly after his accession to the throne^ Sargon 
laid plans to overthrow^ the power of the eastern 
mountaineers. He presaged an attack upon them by 
a conquest of the district Kazallu east of the Tigris/^ 
Slightly beyond Kazallu was Der^ modern Badrah, 
important as commanding an outlet from the moun- 
tains and not yet accounted a really Babylonian city.^^ 
Its capture led him to more truly Elamite territpry; 
and, in an inscription which does not attempt to be a 
topographical description of his march, he lists the 
individuals wLom he has encountered and the cities 
from which he has obtained booty/^ Here are enu- 
merated various rulers of Barahshi: Ul . . . . and 
Sidgau, both shakkanakku% or governors; Kunduba, 

Omens in L. W. King, Chronicles Concerning Early Babylonian Kings 
(London, 1907), I, 41 f.; cf. the chronicle, ibid.^ 11, 5. 

^7 Conquest of Der by Sargon is mentioned only in the geographical 
treatise which may describe his empire, published by O. Schroeder, 
Keilschrifttexte ans Assur versckiedenen Inhalt s^ No. 92; cf. W. F. Albright, 

Babylonian Geographical Treatise on Sargon of Akkad’s Empire,” 
JAOS^ XLV (1925), 193-245, and XLVI (1926), 220-30. For the loca- 
tion of Der see E. Forrer, J)ie Provbizeinteilung des assyriscken Reiches 
(Leipzig, 1920), p. 97; Sidney Smith in Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, 

xvni (1932), 2S-32. 

The text is a composite of L. Legrain, Royal Inscriptions and Frag- 
ments from Nippur and Babylon {PBS, VoL XV), No. 4I and pp. 12 ff., 
and Poebel, Historical and Grammatical Texts, No. 34 (cf. Poebel, His- 
torical Texts, pp. 184 IF.); both now complete in Barton, EISA, pp. no ff. 



HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


a judge; and Dagu, a brother of the king of Barahshi. 
Zina^ the ishakku or prince of Huhunuri/^ and Hi- 
darida . . the ishakku of Gunilaha^ are both men™ 
tioned, as are the cities Saliamu, Karne . . . . , Heni^ 
and Bunban(?)d^ These were but lesser figures in the 
contest; the list now proceeds to mention the chief 
actors in the drama^ Sanam-Shimut^ an ishakku of 
Elam, and Luh-ishan, whom Sargon's ill-informed 
scribes called the son of Hiship-rashir and king of 
Elam. We know him better as Luhhi-ishshan, the 
eighth king of Awan, who was the successor, if not 
the ^on, of Kikku-sime-temti, and whose own son 
was Hiship-rashir or, rather, Hishep-ratep.^^ Sargon’s 
scribes did know, however, of Awan, for it together 
with Susa closes the enumeration. 

Somewhat later another venture into the east 
proved even more successful. Once more Sargon en- 
gaged with Sidgau and Kunduba of Barahshi, who 
were now joined by an ishakku of Shirihum, and with 
Sanam-Shimut and Luhhi-ishshan. The latter may 
have been killed, for shortly afterward ""Hiship- 
rashir, king of Elam,’’ in whom we recognize Hishep- 
ratep, sent tribute to the warrior of Agade through 

So perhaps with sign traces. 

Two dots are used to indicate loss of a single sign; four dots repre- 
sent loss of more than one or of an uncertain number of signs. 

Also uru+a. 

Text cited above, p. 26, n. 13. For Legrain’s Hisibrasini read 
Hiship-rashir; the si may be read si in this period, and the ending -r is the 
Elamite masculine singular, while -p (as in ratep) is plural. 



HISTORICAL BEGINNINGS 


29 


the hand of Hibabri; and, if we may judge from the 
fact that a stele of Sargon has been found at Susa, 
this city itself appears to have been captured.^^ 

By this achievement Sargon was free to undertake 
additional conquests in the lands north of Elam. A 
geographical treatise on his empire furnishes the 
names of many districts in this region which later 
scribes alleged he had subdued. There we find Lubdu 
in the land of Arrapha, which is the district surround- 
ing the modern town Kirkuk, besides 'The way of the 
upper and lower Zab'’ and the lands Lullubium and 
Gutium. These lay north of the present Diyaia River, 
whose place of exit from the mountains was eventu- 
ally knowm by the Elamites as lalman and which 
here appears as the land Arman. In addition to these, 
the lands Nikkum and Der to the south of this river 
are mentioned; and in a final summary Marhashi 
(better known as Barahshi), Tukrish, Elam, and 
Anshan are named. We may accept as fact Sargon's 
conquest of the majority of the lands enumerated, but 
we must ask for further evidence before including in 
his empire Lullubium, Gutium, and Tukrish, all of 
which, like Anshan, lay within the Zagros boundary 
range.^-^ 

23 Scheil, X, 4 ff.; J.-Et. Gautier, '‘Note sur une st^e de Sargon 
Tancien,” RT^ XXVII (1905), 176-79; Essad Nassouhi, “La stele de 
Sargon i’ancien/’ iLf, XXI (1924), 65-74. 

=4 Text cited above, p. 27, n. 17. In the old Hurrian text from Boghaz- 
koy referred to above, an Immashkush as king of kings of Lullubium and 
a Kiklipataiiish of Tukrish are included among predecessors of Manish- 
tusu. 



3 ° 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Like so many empires which expand too rapidly, 
Sargon’s crumbled at the first sign of revolt; and he 
himself was its victim. Arrayed against his successor, 
Rimush, were even Babylonian princes, among them 
the ishakku of Kazallu, Asharid, and the king, the 
ishakku, and the great sukkal or “messenger” of Der. 
But Rimush, like Sargon, bore the stamp of the con- 
queror. Quickly he brought all Babylonia under con- 
trol; then he too looked eastward. In that direction 
Elam, or rather Awan, was naturally his chief op- 
ponent; and Awan had asked and received support 
from .the shakkanakku of the land Zahara and from 
Barahshi, where Sidgau was still shakkanakku under 
his king Abalgamash.^^ Valiant as their resistance 
may have been, the cause of the highlanders was a 
lost one. Rimush himself proudly claims the victory; 
the modern excavator proves his claim by unearthing 
in Babylonia booty from the conquest of Elam and 
Barahshi: vases at Nippur, once presented to Enlil, 
and vases and a macehead at Ur, formerly offered to 
Sin."'® 

Susa fell to the warriors of Rimush; and when 
Rimush was succeeded by Manishtusu it was in this 
city that an Elamite, Uba, dedicated a bust of his new 
suzerain to Narute, a local deity. Cylinder seals in- 

This inscription is a continuation of that cited above, p. 27, n. 1 8 ; 
on the name Abaigamash cf. Speiser, op. cit., p. 44, n. 66. 

Hilprecht, Old Babylonian Inscriptions y Part i, Nos. 5 and 10, and 
cf. pp. 20 f.; Gadd and Legrain, Royal Inscriptions^ Nos. 9 f. and 273. 



HISTORICAL BEGINNINGS 3 1 

form us tKat Uba was actually the ishakku of Elam.'” 
No more is heard of the kings of Awan, though Elam- 
ite antiquaries named Helu as the successor to 
Hishep-ratep. Perhaps he was active in Anshan and 
Shirihum^^ the mountains north and northeast of 
Elam^ where the Assyrians were to find the land 
Parsumash and into which the Iranian Chishpish or 
Teispes entered about 675 b.c. For Manishtusu di- 
vided his troops and sent one army into this region; 
successful^ his warriors brought the defeated king 
back to Babylonia and led him in triumph before 
Shamash in Sippar. The other army crossed the 
Persian Gulf to the Persian coast, where it defeated 
the w^arriors from thirty-two cities; the whole region 
was devastated up to the mines of precious metals, 
and the way was opened for the transportation of 
diorite and valuable ores from the Persian coast of 
the Gulf to Babylonia.^^ 

Mem., X, I3 and XIV, 4; the reading of the name Uba is doubtful. 

For the division of troops see the Constantinople inscription pub- 
lished by Thureau-Dangin in “Notes assyriologiques/’ RA, VII (1910), 
179-84; see also the “Cruciform Monument” in CT, VoL XXXII, Pis. 
1-4; cf. L. W. King, “The Cruciform Monument of Manishtusu,” iU-df, IX 
(1912), 91-105. For claims of wider conquest cf. the broken statue from 
Susa published by Scheil, “Inscription de hlanistusu,” RJ, VII, 103-6, 
now in Mem., XIV, 1-3; the Nippur text, Poebei, Historical Texts, pp. 
205 ff.; and the document from Ur, Gadd and Legrain, Royal Inscriptions, 
No. 274. 

The location of Anshan is still a moot point. So long as the homeland 
of the Achaemenian Persians was believed to lie around Pasargadae, 
scholars were agreed that Anshan must be located far to the southeast of 
Elam in the later Persis at no great distance from the Persian Gulf; cf. 
Prasek Geschichte, 1 , 189, n. i, for a summary of the views expressed on 



32 HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 

Mountaineers do not, however, yield up their 
freedom without a struggle. The Zagros highlanders, 
grown hardy from attempting to eke out an existence 
in the scarped mountains, might be expected to revolt 
more than once against foreign domination. This 
actually happened at the death of Manishtusu. Their 
attempt to break away from or to avoid subservience 
to the new ruler, Naram-Sin, had its ramifications in 
the nearby lowlands of Babylonia, where Kazallu, 
Timtab, and Awak rebelled. Being nearer to Agade, 


this location. In recent years, however, students of Elamite have pro- 
tested against this opinion and have suggested that the Karkhah River 
valley northwest of Susa may have been the center of the land and that 
the city Anshan itself may lie beneath the ruins near Derre-i-Shahr in the 
Saimarreh plain; cf. G. Hiising in Mttteilungen der Anthropologischen 
Gesellschaft in Wkn^ LX (1930), 263; F. Bork in M. Ebert, Reallexikon 
der Vorgeschichte, III, 72 {s.v, *‘Elam. B, Sprache”); F. W. Konig in 
Reallexikon der Assyriologie^ s.v. “Ansan,’’ and again in Geschichte Elams, 
p. 6. Unfortunately, the Elamite texts themselves give but little light on 
the question. 

New data on the origin of the Achaemenian empire enable us to avoid 
some of the earlier difficulties. It is now clear that Anshan was the Elam- 
ite name of a city and district near Parsumash. The latter land, accord- 
ing to Assyrian letters and texts, lay northeast of Elam proper; over it the 
Iranian Chishpish or Teispes ruled about 675 b.c. When the neo-Elamite 
kingdom ceased to lay claim to Anshan, it had good reason for so doing; 
Teispes, now king in Anshan, had already begun true Iranian expansion. 
At his death Ariaramnes, one of his two sons, ruled the district which 
included the later city Pasargadae and which was properly known as 
Parsa. The second son, Kurash or Cyrus I, inherited the original domain 
Parsumash, of which the chief city, after the absorption of the land An- 
shan, was the city Anshan itself. Thus Cyrus II, or Cyrus the Great, as 
a descendant of the latter line, spoke correctly when he proclaimed him- 
self and his progenitors “kings of the city Anshan.*' These facts are dealt 
with more fully on pp. 179 f. and 212 f. They are treated here only for the 
purpose of assisting us to locate the land Anshan. 



HISTORICAL BEGINNINGS 33 

they were perhaps the more easily subdued; but the 
opposition presented to Naram-Sin by peoples to the 
north and east may well have been more ominous. 
Near modern x^ltun Koprii a little kingdom known 
as Shimurrum/^ now ruled by Puttimadal, was ac- 
tively hostile. In the land Namar, later known as 
Namri, in the central Zagros, xArisen, son of Sadar- 
mat, had only recently declared himself king of 
Urkish and Namar;^"" the present ruler, Inbir, had no 
desire to lose his independence. Another enemy was 
to be found in Hubshumkibi, the king of Marhashi or 
Barahshi.^' It is even possible that Hita, named by 
the Elamite scribes as the eleventh king of Awan, had 
induced some of these rulers to join him in one last 
desperate effort against Agade. Naram-Sin was more 
than a match for them; the lands to the north came 
definitely under his control, and even Elam and 
Barahshi were subdued. 

The new master was not, how^ever, merely a de- 
stroyer. Susa, constantly under the impact of Baby- 

Known from texts of the Third Ur Dynasty and located at Zaban, 
modern Altun Koprii; cf. A. H. Sayce in PSBJ, XXI (1899), 10 n, 

3® Thureau-Dangin, ‘Tablette de Samarra/’ RJ, IX (1912), i“4. 

3 ^ List of opponents in text published by Boissier, ‘‘Inscription de 
Naram-Sin,” RJ^ XVI (1919), 1 57-64; cf. now^ Barton, pp. 138 ff.; 
the historicity of this text has been doubted by Landsberger in ZJ^ 
XXXV (1924), 215 f. I. J. Gelb has shown that Apirak (Apishai?), long 
considered an eastern citv, is to be located in the northwest; cf. OIP, 
XXVII, 6. 

3® Gadd and Legrain, Royai Inscriptions^ No. 274. 



34 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Ionian civilization, was rapidly becoming xAkkadian- 
ized; there Naram-Sin with his inscribed bricks 
erected buildings in which he placed his own statues, 
as well as vases from the spoil of Magan.^^ There he 
installed his own ishakku^ Enammune, that the 
region might be held constantly loyal 

The language of the Susa documents of this period, 
no less than the personal names, illustrates clearly 
the effects of such a benevolent policy upon the dis- 
trict. The Akkadian language largely supplants the 
Elamite, and even the names are mostly Semitic. 
These documents, among which there are letters, 
syllabaries, and lists of armor in addition to the usual 
sales, exchanges, and salary payments, throw a vivid 
light on the commercial relationships of the period, 
for the cities Shuruppak and Awal and the land 
Barahshi are all mentioned, as is Umma, whose 
ishakku is known by name.^^ 

In other regions of greater Elam the native lan- 
guage and culture remained unaffected, in proof of 
which there is a treaty between a native king, most 
probably Hita, and Naram-Sin, written in Elamite. 
This begins with an invocation to numerous gods; of 
the Elamite deities mentioned, those best known from 
later texts are Pinikir, Huban, Nahiti or Nahhunte, 
Inshushinak, Shimut, Hurbi, Hutran, and Narude or 

33 Bricks: Mem.^ 11 , 56; vase: MSm.^ IV, i; statues: Mem,^ VI, 2-6. 

34 Mem.^ XIV, 5 £; personal names show that Documents 17, 20, 45, 
and 73 also belong to the time of this ishakku, 

33 Vol. XIV. 



HISTORICAL BEGINNINGS 35 

Narute. Amal, Ninkarak^ and perhaps Ninurta ap- 
pear to be the only foreign gods invoked, and even 
these may have borne Elamite names. The invoca- 
tion is followed bv an oath: “The enemv of Naram- 
Sin is my enemy, the friend of Naram-Sin is my 
friend.” The Elamite is obviously admitting his vas- 
salage to the ruler of Agade.^^ 

By his defeat of the kings of Shimurrum and 
Namar, Naram-Sin came into direct contact with the 
inhabitants of the northern and central Zagros. 
These were the peoples of Luilubium and Gutium, 
of whom Sargon before him may have heard, who 
spoke Caucasian languages related to, but distinct 
from, Elamite. The Lullubi were secure in their pos- 
session of a fertile plain within the mountains, the 
Shehrizor, administered in modern times from the 
town of Sulaimaniyah.2^ Their marauding bands 
could easily interfere with the customary traffic along 
the Babylonian road now^ marked by the towns of 
Kifri, Kirkuk, and Altun Koprii. Tradition knew of a 
king of the Lullubi named Immashkush preceding 
Sargon;^® their ruler in the days of Naram-Sin offered 
battle to the Babylonian in a gorge of the “Black 

36 Scheilj Mem,^ XI, i ff.; cf. Busing, ^uellen^ pp. 7 f. and No. 3. 

37 Cf. Speiser, op. ciL, chap, iv, “The Lullu and the Guti,’* pp. 87”ii9, 
Hiising, Der Zagros und seine Volker {Der ate Orient, IX, Heft 3/4 [1908]), 

pp. igff. 

3S Cf. A. BiUerbeck, Das Sandschak Sukimania^ pp. 6-1 1 ; Speiser, 
“Southern Kurdistan Annual of the American Schools of Oriental 

Research^ VIII (1926-27), 1-41. 

39 See reference above, p, 26, n. 13. 



36 HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 

Mountain,” called today the ‘Tagan’s Pass,” south 
of the Shehrizor. The Lullubian was hopelessly de- 
feated, and to commemorate the victory the king of 
Agade carved on the wails of the gorge a relief, the 
prototype of the better-known '‘Stele of Victory.”'^^ 
A wholly different outcome resulted from Naram-Sin’s 
attack on the Guti, for these barbarians, soon to over- 
run all Babylonia and to bring an end to his dynasty, 
inflicted upon him a crushing defeat/^ 

In Elam proper, Naram-Sin knew how to reward 
long years of faithful service; Enammune, once mere- 
ly the ishakku of Elam, became shakkanakku^ or 
governor, of the land, and as such made a new official 
seal/2 Perhaps the post he relinquished fell to a de- 
serving Elamite, Puzur-Inshushinak, son of Shimbi- 
ishhuk, who first appears as the ishakku of Susa. 
Eager to please his masters, this prince at first wrote 
his inscriptions in Akkadian only,^^ but soon he was 
putting alongside of this language his own proto- 
Elamite. Perhaps with the death or removal of 

Described by C. J. Edmonds, “Two Ancient Monuments in South- 
ern Kurdistan,” Geographical Journal^ LXV (1925), 63 f., reproduced in 
Sidney Smith, Early History of Assyria^ p. 97; the exact site in the Dar- 
band-i-Gawr gorge of the Qara Dagh is near Seosenan on the route be- 
tween Sulaimaniyah and Rabat. 

Mem.y I, 144 fF., and II, 53 ff., PI. ii; cf. SAK, pp. 166 f. 

Weidner Chronicle from Ashur; see Giiterbock in ZA, XLII (1934), 

47 ff- 

Mem.y XIV, 6 . 44 Door socket in Scheil, MSm.y VI, 7. 

Statuette of a goddess in Scheii, Mem.y XIV, 17 fF. The latest at- 
tempt to decipher all the proto-Elamite texts of this ruler, with references 



HISTORICAL BEGINNINGS 37 

Enammune, he too htcdcmt shakkafiakku of Elam; but 
if the new office implied an increase of power^ it 
meant also an extension of his sphere of activities^ for 
we find him embarking upon foreign conquest. Not 
improbably he declared to Naram-Sin that he was 
merely subjecting vassals who had been disobedient 
to the lord of Agade. On a statue presented to his 
god he states that when Kimash and Hurtum made 
war against him, he conquered them and ravaged 
Hupshana. Since Kimash was far up in the Zagros 
at a point opposite Kirkuk, and Hurtum is possibly 
that Humurtum so familiar from Third Ur Dynasty 
date formulas, Naram-Sin might w'ell have been w^ary, 
for it was into territory at least nominally his that 
Puziir-Inshushinak was entering. The Elamite also 
claims that he conquered over sixty other sites. Al- 
though these are enumerated apparently without 
topographical order, we may still gain some history 
from their names. Possible mention of Kashshen may 
be our earliest reference to the land from wffiich the 
Kassites took their name. Gutu surely attests con- 
tact with the Gutians or with the land whence their 


to the previous literature, has been made by F. Bork, Die Stiichinschrifien 
mn Susa (Konigsberg i. Pr., 1924). Unfortunately, there is no proof that 
these texts are duplicates of the Akkadian. 

-^^On its location cf, Poebel in ZA, XXXIX (1930), 137 f.; on Hup- 
shana cf. the Hupshan of Shilhak-Inshushinak, MSm,^ XI, 21 ff, (No. 92), 
obv. i 95 and rev. ii 34, and Mem,, V, 39 ff. (No. 77), iv 10, and of the neo- 
Elamite Shutruk-Nahhunte, Mhn., V, 67 (No. 85^), !. 9. Cf. the place 
Hupshan and the god Aiahupshan in Rawiinson, Cuneiform Inscriptions 
of Western Asia, Vol. II, PL 60, No. x i 7 f . 



38 HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 

hordes descended upon Babylonia. Shilwan suggests 
the mountainous country east of ancient Der near 
modern Sirwan. The land Huhunuri was soon to be 
familiar from date formulas of the Third Dynasty of 
Ur, and Mu Turran^” may be the Me Turnat of the 
Assyrian annals, a city on the modern Diyala River. 
Separate mention is made of the king of Simash, 
who came from afar to seize the feet of Puzur-Inshu- 
shinak.*^^ 

Booty from the humbled cities enriched Susa, and 
a new temple to Inshushinak crowned the acropolis. 
For its foundation deposit Puzur-Inshushinak de- 
creed four magi of silver, emblems of silver and gold, 
a long dagger, and a great ax whose sides were over- 
laid with silver. With magnificent ceremony a fine 
new statue of the deity was brought to the site on a 
new canal leading from the city Sidari. In his honor 
two sheep were sacrificed daily, and at his gate mu- 
sicians sang morning and evening. We are told all 
this by a stele with an Akkadian inscription, which 
further declares that Puzur-Inshushinak gave right- 
eous judgment to the city.^® From the wreck of the 
temple a lion-headed block, inscribed in Akkadian 
and in the still undecipherable proto-Elamite, has 

47 Read by Scheii as Mu 4 ^um?-an, 

48 Scheii, Mem.y XIV, 9 fF., supplemented by the cities mentioned on 
the fragment Mim.y VI, 14 f. Many names are almost illegible; others are 
at present unknown. 

49 Scheii, Mem.y IV, 4 ff,; cf. SAK, pp. 178 ff. 

s® Scheii, Mem.y VI, 8; cf. SAK^ pp. 178 f.; drawing and description by 
Lampre, Mem,^ VIII, 162 ff. To this period also belongs a bas-relief with 
proto-Elamite text, Mem,, Vol. VI, PL 2. 



HISTORICAL BEGINNINGS 


39 


survived to our day. Clay cones commemorated the 
erection of a dwelling for the god Shugu on behalf of 
Inshushinak;^" but alabaster statuettes^ fashioned 
with the boast that they were neither of silver nor of 
copper, were dedicated to deities other than the local 
god, and on some of these the Akkadian inscription is 
supplemented by a proto-Elamite text.^^ In the curses 
which he invokes against those who would damage his 
monuments, Puzur-Inshushinak calls upon Inshu- 
shinak, Narite or Narute, and Nati of the Elamite 
deities, and upon Shamash, Nergal, Ishtar and Sin, 
Enlil and Ea, and Ninhursag of the Babylonian gods. 
Some of the latter may have had Elamite epithets, 
for the proto-Elamite texts themselves indicate that 
the ruler was attempting to revive the national feeling 
of his subjects. 

If this w^ere indeed his purpose, he was wise to 
wait until the death of his nominal lord in Babylonia. 
When Naram-Sin gave place to Sharkalisharri, the 
Elamite declared his independence with a vengeance. 
xAllied with Zahara, the land which had previously 
aided Elam and Barahshi against Rimush, he invaded 
Babylonia early in the reign of the new sovereign; his 
troops were driven back only after they had pene- 
trated to the territory of Opis in the very center of 

Scheil, MSm,^ 11 , 58-62; cf. SAK^ pp. 176 f.; notice of discovery in 
Jequier, Mem.^ I, 117. 

(1) Mem,, n, 63-65; SAK, pp. 17S f.; (2) Mem,, X, ii (No. Ill), 
bearing a proto- Eiamite text; (3) Mem., XIV, 20 f.; details of discovery, 
Jequier, Mem,, I, 128 £, and VII, 27. Other proto-Elamite texts are 
given in Mem,, VoL X, Pis. 4 f. 



40 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


i\kkad.^"^ Fortified by this success — for safe return 
from an invasion into the land of the king of Agade^ 
the king of the ''Four World-Quarters/’ could be con- 
sidered nothing less than a triumph — Puzur-Inshu- 
shinak was at once crowned king of Awan, as succes- 
sor of Hita.5^ As for Sharkalisharri, it is no wonder 
that he v/as thereafter merely "King of Agade/' 
while the Elamite Puzur-Inshushinak tells how in one 
year Inshushinak looked with favor upon him, the 
mighty king of Awan, and granted to him the "Four 
World-Regions/'^^ 

Meanwhile the peoples of the central Zagros had 
become restless. To highlanders such as themselves 
the lowlands of Babylonia seemed always most desir- 
able. From afar they watched the fertile plain teem- 
ing with activity, until desire or need became too 
strong, or new peoples appeared from their rear to 
drive them forward. Then irresistibly they poured 
into the rich land which lay before them. For a time 
they obtained control; more and more, how^ever, they 
themselves became subject to the higher civilization 
which they found in the new habitat, and succumbed 
to its inexorable influences. 

So it was with the people of Lullubium. From their 
central point, the Shehrizor, they advanced south- 
eastward to the district Holwan, where a relief of 
their king Anubanini has been found at Zohab near 

53 Date formula of Sliarkalisharri; cf. Reallexikon der Assyriologie^ 

n, 133- 

54 Mem*^ XXIII, iv. ss Stele, published by Scheil, Mem,^ X, 9 f. 



HISTORICAL BEGINMXGS 


d.1 


Sar-i-PuL His inscription is in the Akkadian script 
and language; as the mighty king, king of Luilubiiinij 
he declares that he has set up his own image and that 
of Ishtar on Aloiiiit Batir^ and with a good Baby- 
lonian curse he calls upon Anu and Antum, Enlil and 
Ninlil^ Adad and Ishtar^ Sin and Shamash, and other 
deities to preserve his monument.^'' In later times 
tradition assigned him to the ranks of the kings of 
Gutiiim and finally made him a king of the city 
Kutha. As a horrible monster he figured in a legend 
which illustrates the impression made by Guti bar- 
barians upon the inhabitants of Babylonia.^? XqI far 
distant from his relief is the stele of Tardunni^ son 
of Ikki, also bearing an Akkadian inscription which 
invokes Shamash and Adad/'^® Tardunni must be 
placed in the same period and may likewise have been 
a king of Lullubiiim. 

Perhaps the Guti^ who seem to have lived north 
of the Shehrizor, v/ere responsible for this advance of 
the Lollubi. They too longed for possession of the 

J. de Morgan, Mission sdemifiqtie e?i Perse^ IV, 160-71, PL it; cf. 
De Morgan and Scheil in “Les deux steles de ZohabT PT^ XIV (1893), 
100-IC5; Mem .^ n, 67 f.; cf. SAK ^ pp. 172 f. For recent photographs and 
drawings cf. Herzfeld, Tor von Asien^ pp. 3 fF. 

Cr, Vol. XIII, Pis. 39 fF.; cf. L. W. King, Seven Tablets of Creation, 
I, 140 ff. On the identity of the Anubanini of the inscription cf. Homme! 
in “Assyriologicai XotesC PSBA, XXI (1899), 115-17; P. Jensen in 
KB, VI, Heft I, 552, objected to this identification on grounds which 
seem insufficient to the writer. 

s® Stele at Sheikhan; cf. Schei! in RT, XIV (1893), 105 f.; cf. SAK, 
pp. 172 f. Only a preliminary notice of a copy made recently by Herzfeld 
has appeared in ZDMG, LKIKX. (1926), 228. 



42 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Land of the Two Rivers, and their victory over 
Naram-Sin some years before had given them con- 
fidence. Their masses poured into Babylonia, strik- 
ing a glancing blow at their southern neighbors, but 
never pausing in their headlong dash for the region 
most to be desired. Sharkalisharri valiantly at- 
tempted to stem the tide; one of his year formulas 
records an expedition against them, another the cap- 
ture of Sharlak, their king.^’ But his efforts were use- 
less, and he himself became their prey. Shortly after 
his death, even the ghost of independent rule in the 
cities disappeared; and the period following his reign 
was one of such anarchy that it became known under 
the suggestive designation: “Who was king? Who 
was not king?”®° 

About the same time, the Elamites and their dy- 
nasty of Awan disappear from the stage of oriental 
history. Puzur-Inshushinak was the twelfth and last 
king of Awan, and with his sudden eclipse the land is 
enshrouded in darkness. Babylonia and Elam alike 
appear to have been inundated by the Gutian tide. 

59 SJK^ pp. 22 § f,; Reallexikon der Assynologie^ II, 133. Sharlak, like 
Anubanini, was for a time with some misgivings considered a king of 
Kutha; cf. Hommel, Ethnologic und Geographic des alten Orients (Miin- 
chen, 1926), p. 1017; see, however, Speiser, Mesopotamian Origins, p, 98, 
n. 44. 

King lists, as in Langdon, “Oxford Editions of Cuneiform Texts, 
II, 17. The confusion within Babylonia throughout this period is illus- 
trated by a letter and a lament published by S. Smith in JR AS, 1932, 
pp. 295 ff.; the lament was first published by Pinches in “Assyriological 
Gleanings,” PSBA, XXIII (1901), 196-99. 



CHAPTER III 


BABYLONIAN DYNASTS AND 
KINGS OF SLMASH 

T he peoples of Gutium who overwhelmed 
Babylonia in the tw'enty-fifth century b.c. 
appear indeed to have been barbarians. Later 
authors hurl fierce invectives against them^ and ap- 
parently these were not altogether unwarranted. It 
was said that they antagonized the gods, carried off 
the sovereignty of Sumer to the mountains, and 
established enmity and wickedness in the land.^ 
From the viewpoint of the Babylonian, schooled in 
the virtues of law and order, no greater accusation 
could be brought against any people than that they 
lacked the firm hand of a rightful sovereign. Yet it 
was said of the Guti that they had no ruler before they 
entered the lowlands."" We may attribute this state- 

^ Utuhegai inscription; cf. Thureau-Dangin, "La fin de la domination 
gutienne,” RA, IX (1912), 1 11-20, and X, 98-100; M. Witzel in Baby~ 
loniaca^ VII (1913), 51-62. 

* King lists, as in Langdon, "Oxford Editions of Cuneiform Texts,” 
II, 18. The assumption that the Guti capital was Arrapha because they 
carried off" to this city the statue of Anunit of Sippar (apparently first 
stated by Scheil in RT^ XXXIII [1911], 216, and recently by Langdon in 
Cambridge Ancient History, I, 423) is based on a misinterpretation of the 
"Constantinople” text of Nabu-naid, which is No. 8 in Langdon, Die neu- 
habylonischen Konigsinschriften, pp. 276 f. 

43 



44 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


ment to the fact that Sharkalisharri captured their 
kingj Sharlakj and excuse it on that account; but we 
cannot pardon their overthrow of the administrative 
and economic order^ which is indicated by the dearth 
of Babylonian records. 

Little is known about the Gutian rule in Baby- 
lonia save the names of their kings in two dynastic 
lists. A few scattered inscriptions of sovereigns who 
do not appear in those records tell us but little of their 
makers. The lists themselves disagree; and;, although 
the brief reigns which are given to the individual 
kings indicate a period of intense unrest and inner 
combat, these figures are all suspiciously alike and 
arouse distrust.^ One record says that the invaders 
controlled the land for 124 years; another insists that 


3 The main list as published by Langdon in “Oxford Editions of 
Cuneiform Texts/’ II, 18 f., gives the following names with their lengths 
of rule: 


Iznta (error for Imbia) 

3 years 

Kurum . . 

I year 

Ingishu 

.... 6 

. . . .nedin 

. . 3 years 

Nikillagab 

.... 6 

. . . .rabum 

. . 2 

Shulme 

.... 6 

Irarum 

. . 2 

Elulumesh 

.... 6 

Ibranum 

. . I year 

Ilimabakesh 

. . . - 5 

Hablura 

. . 2 years 

Igeshaush (?) 

.... 6 

Puzur-Sin, son of Hablum . . . 

. . 7 

larlagab 

.... 15 

larlaganda 

.. 7 

Ibate. 

. . • . 3 

[ ] 

7 

I aria 

. .. . 3 

Tirigafn] 

. . 40 days 


The second list is incomplete; it has been published in part by Poebel, 
Historical and Grammatical Texts^ No. 4 (cf. Poebel, Historical Texts^ 
p. 80), and in part by L. Legrain, Historical Fragments {PBS^ Vol. XIII), 
No. I, p. 27. It gives only the following names: 

Imbia S (or 3) years Warlagaba 6 years 

Ingishu 7 larlagash 3 



BABYLONIAN DYNASTS 


the correct total is 125 years and 40 days. It is im- 
possible to doubt the proven ability of Babylonian 
mathematicians; yet our addition of the separate 
reigns totals only 91 years and 40 days, leaving an 
unexplained balance of 34 years. From these facts it 
should be clear that there is much yet to be learned 
concerning the period of Gutian domination. 

Toward the end of the period the barbarians appear 
to have come under the persistent and prevailing in- 
fluence of Babylonian culture. Perhaps we may as- 
sign to this time those kings who have left their own 
inscriptions but whose names do not appear in the 
king lists of the native scribes. Lasirab, king of 
Gutium, called upon the god of Gutium as well as 
Ishtar and Sin to guard a macehead upon which he 
inscribed an x\kkadian text.^^ To his title another 
ruler, named Erridupizir, added ‘'King of the Four 
World-Regions’" when he dedicated an object to Enlil 
of Nippur.^ 

Strange as it may appear, some of the Babylonian 
cities seem to have enjoyed a renewal of prosperity 
under the foreign rule. In these the ishakku's of the 
older races apparently retained control, though they 
fully acknowledged the sovereignty of the invaders. 
One of these cities was Umnia, whose ishakku Lugai- 
annadu tells us that while Sium was king of Gutium 

4 H. Winckler in ZA, IV (1S89), 406; cf. SAK, pp. 170 ff. 

5 Hilprecht, BE, Ser. D, V, Part !, 20-24; cf. Poebel, Historical Texts, 
P- 134- 



46 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


there was welfare in the land for thirty-five years.^ 
Nammahni^ another ishakku of the same place, re- 
built an old temple of Ninurra at the time Arlagan 
was his ruler;’' and a scribe of Umma dedicated a vo- 
tive plaque to his king, Saratigubisin.® 

Tirigan, a Gutian king whose name was given to 
several cities within the empire/ reigned but forty 
days before he fell a prey to the hate and violence of a 
native prince. The rule of Gutium was over. Im- 
mediately whatever unity had existed within the 
kingdom disappeared, and tiny independent states 
arose in the Zagros regions and in Elam as well as in 
Babylonia. To us some of these principalities are old 
friends known from the days of Sargon or of Puzur- 
Inshushinak of Awan. Others are new, to whom the 
fall of Gutium for the first time gave freedom. 

Far to the north, near the foothills of the Zagros, 
was Urbillum, more famous as Arbela, whose name 

^ Scheil, ‘*Une nouvelie dynastie sumero-accadienne,” Comptes rendus 
de r Academie des inscriptions et belles-lettres^ 1911^ PP- 31B-27; cf. Poebel, 
Historical Texts, pp. 134 f. 

” Ciay, Miscellaneous Inscriptions (“Yale Oriental Series,” Baby- 
lonian Texts, Vol. I), No. 13, pp. 1 1 f., corrected by C. H. W. Johns, 
“The Dynasty of Gutium,” PSBA, XXXVIII (1916), 199 f. 

^ Thureau-Dangin in “Notes assyriologiques,” RA, IX (1912), 73'“76; 
cf. Poebel, Historical Texts, p. 135. 

» Cf. Sidney Smith, “The Three Cities Called Tirqan,” JRAS, 1928, 
pp. 868“75. One city is described as lying “in front of Gutium” and is 
equated with Harhar; for a location of Harhar south of the Zeribor Sea 
on the upper Diyala cf. Billerbeck, Das Sands chak Suleimania, p, 63. 

“ Utuhegal of Uruk, whose text was cited above, p. 43. 



BABYLONIAN DYNASTS 


47 


still lingers as Erbil.” South of this was Shimurrum^ 
at modern Altun Kopru^ the main crossing of the 
Lower Zab River 7 ^ South of this again was Harshe, 
perhaps the Hurshitum of the Babylonians^ at the 
village known today as Tuz Khurmatli.'^’^ In the 
mountains east of Kirkuk, Kimash once more became 
turbulent. Remnants of the Lullubi banded together 
within the central Zagros, and the adjacent land 
Ganhar proved that it too could be troublesome. 
Farther south Marhashi, known in ^Akkadian as 
Barahshi, began once more to rear its head; and in 
her low plain it would seem that even Susa declared 
for independence. Northeast of Elam a self-reliant 
state arose in Anshan; and in Simash, a land perhaps 
not far distant, which had sent tribute to Puzur- 
Inshushinak, the ruler Girnamme founded a new 
dynasty.’'*^ Any Babylonian sovereign who would 
bring unity to the Near East must subdue many of 
these city-states; the effort would demand constant 
warfare and recourse to numerous political intrigues. 

The Babylonian ruler who overthrew the Guti was 
himself subjected by Ur-Nammu (2290 b.c.),^^ who 
founded the Third Dynasty of Ur. His successor, 

” Sayce in PSBA^ XXI (1899), 21, n. 2. 

See above, p. 33. See below, p. 60. 

Named on the same tablet which lists the kings of Awan, published 
by Scheil in RA^ XXVIII (1931), 1-8, now in Mem.^ XXIII, iv. 

^5 In an unpublished study Professor Olmstead has solved many of the 
chronological difficulties in the periods which follow. I am greatly in- 
debted to him for permission to employ the new dates in this manuscript. 



48 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Shulgi ('2'272“2226 B.c.)^ began that policy of expan- 
sion which brought under the control of Ur many of 
the states just enumerated.'"'^ In his seventh year 
Shulgi restored the god Sataran^'^ to the temple at 
Der, and in his eighth he returned Numushda to the 
shrine in Kazallu. The reason is obvious: the domi- 
nance of Ur was so universally recognized by the cities 
within Babylonia proper that local deities could be 
established in their own dwellings without danger of 
revolt by the separate districts. 

Now began a determined effort to explore the east 
and- the north. From Der it was an easy march to 
Marhashi, to whose ishakku Shulgi married his own 
daughter in the fourteenth year. The ravaging of 
Ganhar in the twenty-second year initiated a series of 
raids against the Lullubi. Shimurrum on the Lower 
Zab was attacked in the twenty-third and twenty- 
fourth years^ and Harshe in the twenty-fifth. 

By this time Shulgi felt capable of bringing the 
states which lay beyond the Zagros boundary range 
under his control; in his twenty-eighth year he mar- 
ried a daughter to the ishakku of Anshan, perhaps 

Shulgi date formulas best in Reallexikon der AssyriohgUy Vol. II, 
s.v, “Datenlisten”; cf. also Myhrman, Sumerian Administrative Docu- 
ments {BEy Ser. A, Vol. Ill, Part i), pp. 34-39, and SAKy pp. 229 ff. 
List of Ur III ishakhds conveniently gathered by C. E. Keiser, Patesis of 
the Vr Dynasty (“Yale Oriental Series,” ResearckeSy Vol. IV, Part 2). 

For the reading ^KA.Di—^^Sataran see Weidner mAOFy IX ( 1933 - 34 ), 
99; for earlier readings see Poebei in MVAGy XXVI, Heft i (1921), 2, 
n. 3; R. Scholtz in ZAy XLI (1933), 304; cf., however, the name Awtl-^a- 
di in Mem.y Vol. XVIII, No. 1 59, L 4. 



BABYLONIAN DmASTS 


49 


Libum or Shalabum — an act which should imply the 
latter's vassalage. The kingdom of Simash, now ruled 
by Tazitta 1/^ was apparently untouched. Returning 
to the norths Shulgi ravaged Shimurrum for the third 
time in his thirtieth year^ and Ganhar for the second 
and third times in the twenty-ninth and thirty-first^ 
respectively. In the interim Anshan, possibly sup- 
ported by Tazitta of Simashj revolted and had to be 
won back in the thirty-second. In the attempt to pre- 
serve control of this region Shalhuni was established 
as shakkanakku of Zabum; but a little later we hear 
of a second devastation of Anshan/^ the war against 
which was apparently a failure. 

In the latter years of the reign, attack was con- 
centrated on the restless northern districts. Far from 
LIr, and belonging to a hostile race, the peoples of 
these regions were unwilling to accept domination by 
the south, and their determined resistance finds its 
echo in the date formulas. Shashrum was entered in 
the fortieth year; Shimurrum and Lullubium were 
ravaged for the ninth time in the forty-second. In 
the forty-third, Shimurrum, Lullubium, Ganhar, and 
Urbillum felt the hand of the conqueror; while 
Kimash and Humurtum, probably the Hurtum of 
earlier fame, were penetrated in the forty-fourth. As 
the most important border fortress guarding the 

Scheil, Mini., XXIII, iv. 

C. E. Keiser, Selected Temple Documents of the Ur Dynasty (‘"'Yale 
Oriental Series,” Babylonian Texts, Vol. IV), No. 286 and p. 18. 



5 ° 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


eastern mountains, Der received a shakkanakku by 
the forty-sixth year,"*" in which we hear once more of 
a devastation of Harshe, Kimash, and Humurtum. 

While all these raids into foreign lands were being 
carried out, Susa and her lowlands appear to have 
been completely under Shulgi’s control. The city may 
have been won at the time he first entered Anshan, 
that is, in his twenty-eighth year, for we first hear 
of an ishakku of Susa, Urkium, in the thirty-first. 
Thereafter the story is more easily told from Shulgi’s 
own texts in the city. He erected a new temple for 
Inshushinak, the god of Susa, and a new dwelling for 
the goddess Ninhursag, known to Elamites since the 
days of the last king of Awan. His bricks, inscribed 
bronze statuettes, and stone tablets were still to be 
found on the Susian acropolis a millennium later 
when Shilhak-Inshushinak used them for foundation 
deposits, and again after another five hundred years 
when the neo-Elamite rulers employed them for the 
same purpose;®^ even Shulgi himself can hardly have 
expected such honor. To the great lady Ningal he 

Seals mentioning Ur-Sin, shakkanakku of Uruk and Der, published 
by Scheil in RA, XIII (1916), 20 f. 

All these objects were found in the neo-Elamite temple foundations; 
cf. De Mecquenem, Mim.^ VII, 63; XII, 67-72. Objects dedicated to 
Inshushinak include bricks: Mem.y IV, 8, and VI, 20; statuettes: De 
Mecquenem, Mim.^ Vol. VII, PL 11 ; tablets: Mem,^ VI, 21; for the in- 
scriptions cf. also SAKy pp. 190 ff. Other inscriptions of Shulgi have only 
recently been uncovered in the “Villa royale’^; cf. De Mecquenem, M/w., 
XXV, 236. The texts of the objects dedicated to Ninhursag have not 
yet been published; cf. De Mecquenem, Mem.y XII, 70-72. 



BABYLONIAN DYNASTS 


inscribed a precious pearl/' while two of his sub- 
ordinates in the city, Ur-niginmu and Nin-kisalshu, 
presented to the '‘Lady of the City’’ a macehead for 
his life.^^ 

From this time forward, almost to the exclusion of 
the more truly Elamite regions such as Anshan and 
Simash, the influence of Ur reigned supreme in Susa 
and the adjacent districts. As “Elam,” this territory 
became the province of Ur par excellence. Multitudes 
of men-at-arms for the protection of caravans, 
couriers bearing royal messages, iskakkus, and oc- 
casionally men of even higher rank such as sukkallus 
or plenipotentiaries, traversed Babylonia between the 
royal capital and this land, receiving at the various 
cities en route the provisions necessary for their 
journey; the records of their transit are found in 
hundreds of contemporary clay documents.^-^ The 
Elamites, not to be outdone, entered actively into 
the comparatively new but wealth-producing com- 
merce; and hundreds entered Babylonia to take part 
in numerous business ventures. Thus the same docu- 
ments mention Elamites from Susa, Anshan, Simash 
or Shimash, Huhunuri, Marhashi, and many other 

Scheil, Mem.y VI, 22; cf. SAK^ pp. 194 f.; on details of discovery cf. 
De Mecquenem, Mhn^y VII, 94. 

Scheil in i?T, XXXI (1909), 135, now in Mdm.^ XIV, 22. 

Cf. C.-F. Jean, “L’Elam sous ia dynastie d’Ur,” RA^ XIX (1922), 

1-44. 



52 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


citieSj^^ while Zabum and Adamdun"^*^ figure no less 
prominently. Of Adamdun, the name of which is 
possibly derived from the Elamite name for Elam,^^ 
we even know of two ishakku's in the reign of Shulgi. 
These are Uba in the forty-first year and Riba in the 
forty-fourth. We may never know how far Ur’s con- 
trol extended beyond this low plain into Iran^ but we 
may be perfectly certain that its influence was keenly 
felt deep within the hinterland. 

The death of a ruler is always the signal for an out- 
break of restless peoples; it was a striking tribute to 
Shiilgi’s administrative ability that this region ac- 
cepted without a struggle his successor Bur-Sin 
(2225-2217). For three years the new sovereign al- 
lowed the officials of Shulgi to remain unmolested; 

Including Siri, Gizili, Gisha, Siu, Zaul, Uium (doubtless somewhere 
on the Ulai River), Kinunir, and Mahili; cf. Thureau-Dangin in Comptes 
rendus de rAcademie des inscriptions et belles 4 ettres^ 1902, pp. 88 f. 

Also URU-fA and uru.az. 

27 Adamdun equated with Ha(l)tamti by Scheil, Mem,, X, 3. The 
objections to this equation have been based largely on the erroneous read- 
ing Hapirti for Hatamti, but Professor PoebeFs demonstration that 
Sumerian and Akkadian Elam were derived from the Elamite Ha{l)tamti 
now definitely proves the latter reading; cf. his article “The Name of 
Elam in Sumerian, Akkadian, and Hebrew,'' AJSL, XLVIII (1931/32), 
20-26. Objections to the equation of Adamdun with Hatamti are still 
in order, however, for in the Sumerian texts Adamdun is obviously a city, 
while Hatamti in the Elamite texts is the land. For a solution of the prob- 
lem two other documents must be considered. The first is Thureau- 
Dangin, Recueil de tablettes chaldeennes (Paris, 1903), No. 351, rev. 2 ff., 
where occurs the mention of Elamites from Siri coming from Adamdun. 
The other is an inscription of Ibi-Sin published by Gadd and Legrain, 
Royal Inscriptions, Nos. 210 f. and 289, in which it is stated that Susa, 
Adamdun, and the land Awan were subjected. 



BABYLONIAN DlOvASTS 


then he began to replace them with men of his own 
choosing. In his fourth year a new ishakku of Susa, 
Zariqum, was inducted into office with great ceremony 
in the presence of ten important witnesses;^® his con- 
temporary Nagidda was already the ishakku of 
Adamdun.^^ From the fourth year onward Libanug- 
shabash was to be found in Marhashi, with Busham 
in Simanum by the sixth year. An individual with the 
Semitic name Sharrum-bani, established in Awak by 
the fifth year, remained there till the second year of 
Ibi-Sin, a period of sixteen years, while Ur-ishkur 
likewise was retained in Hamazi from Bur-.Sin's 
seventh year to the second of Gimil-Sin. Such long 
tenures of office bespeak peace and quiet in the land. 

This was not true of the central and northern 
Zagros, where a series of revolts and suppressions 
harried the country. Bur-Sin plundered Urbillum in 
the second year, Shashrum in the sixth, and Hu- 
hunuri and laprum in the seventh. Perhaps after 

Schell, ‘‘Diplomatica/^ Hiipreckt AnnUersary Volume^ pp. 15a f.; 
text recopied by Dossin, Mem.^ Vol. XVIII, No. 219; on the dating cf. 
Scheil in i2T, XXXVII (1915), 133-35* I^ocuments from Susa dated the 
fourth and fifth years of Bur-Sin, Mem., VoL X, Nos. 125 f. 

=*5 Thureau-Dangin, Receidl de tablettes chaldiennes. No. 325; cf. 
Ch.-G. Janneau, Une dynasiie chaldeenne: Les rots d'Ur (Paris, 1911), 
p. 42, n. 2. 

30 For the latter year cf. Scheil in RT, XXXVII (191 5 ), 135 - 37 , where, 
however, the equation of Mtum rahium with a postulated Elamite ha! 
riska and hence Harshe must be denied. Booty from Shashrum received 
in Drehem already in the fourth year suggests that its “devastation” in 
the sixth came as the result of a revolt; cf. Olmstead in AJSL, XXXV 
(1918/19), 77. 



54 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


this frightful lesson^ Huhunuri received Simhuzia as 
ishakkuy with definite instructions to remain loyal. 
Farther norths in the region east and south of modern 
Kirkuk, Hunnini carried on as the ishakku of Kimash 
and shakkanakku of Madga; to him Ugugu dedicated 
a cylinder seal.^^ 

Our sources become fewer with the reign of GimiL 
Sin (2116-2208), although one cannot on that ac- 
count say that the kingdom was already in decline. 
To be sure, Simanum had to be invaded in the third 
year; and Zabshalu, within Babylonia proper at no 
greats distance from the capital, appears to have re- 
volted in the seventh, for it too was plundered. But 
we hear of an ishakku of Humurtum, Hubamersili, in 
the first year; and a daughter of the king was sent, 
apparently in marriage, to the ishakku of Zabshalu 
after its subjection. These events assume the main- 
tenance of law and order. As early as the second year 
we learn of supplies which the daughter of the king 
took into Anshan, doubtless as part of her marriage 
dowry. Anshan, then, had been attacked; we hear 
of this war from another source than the date formu- 
las, namely, from the well-known inscriptions of 
Gudea, ishakku of Lagash from perhaps the eighth 
year of Bur-Sin to at least the sixth year of Gimil-Sin. 

3 ^ Sayce, “Babylonian Cylinders in the Hermitage at St. Petersburg,” 
2 ^, VI (1891), i 6 i -“63; Poebel, “Eine neue sumerische Mundart,” ZA^ 
XXXIX (1930), 129-39. On the location of Madga at Kifri or Tuz 
Khurmatli see, besides Poebel, C. J. Gadd in XXIII (1926), 65. 

Viroiieaud in ZA^ XIX (1905-6), 384. 



BABYLONIAN DYNASTS 


Curiously enough^ Giidea fails to acknowledge any 
superior; in the document which mentions his only 
war^ this very conquest of Anshan in Elam, there is 
no hint that the campaign was carried out in the train 
of Gimil-Sin.^'^ He does inform us that Elamites came 
from Elam and Susians from Susa to aid him in re- 
constructing the temple of his god.*’- We have, there- 
fore, definite evidence that in the time of Gudea and 
GimiLSin Anshan, the Elamite highlands, and the 
Susian plain were all under Babylonian overlordship. 

Further proof comes from the names of cities which 
paid allegiance. By the seventh year Shulgi-admu 
was recognized in one Elamite city,^^ while in Susa it- 
self Beliarik replaced Zariqum a year or two later. 
Gimil-Sin wisely ordered the restoration of the temple 
to Ninhursag on the Susian acropolis, and his owm 
bricks commemorated its rebuilding, 

The uplands to the north of Elam in territory for 
w4ich Shulgi had so valiantly fought were likewise 
obedient to the new lord of Ur. Gudea, again with- 
out reference to his master, describes his operations 

•■55 Statue B, vi 64 tF.; cf. SJK, pp. 70 f.; cf. also Olmstead in AJSL^ 
XXXV, 67 f. 

Cylinder A, xv 6 ff.; cf. I, M. Price, The Great Cylinder Inscriptions 

of Gudea, Part I (Leipzig, 1899), p, -5; translation iMd., Part II 
(Leipzig, 1927), p. 19; cf. SJK, pp. 104 f. 

URU*-f”A. 

Scheil, Mem,, IV, 8, and X, 12; cf. Oe Mecquenem, Mem., XII, 71. 
For other bricks recently discovered in the *‘Viiia royale” cf. 0 e Mec- 
quenem, Mem., XXV, 2u, The tombs of this period at Susa are par- 
ticularly rich in funerary equipment: cf. iMd., pp. 209-1 1 and 227-365. 



56 HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 

in Kimash^ where he quarried copper^ while Madga to 
the south of Kimash furnished him gypsum. His 
numerous references to the use of lapis lazuli arouse 
our interest, for this highly prized stone, in antiquity 
as today, must be sought in eastern Iran, and in 
Gudea’s time commercial relationships with the 
plateau could not have been interrupted. 

Perhaps because he was definitely afraid of the 
breakup of his empire, Gimil-Sin consolidated the rule 
over the more doubtful and troublesome regions in 
the hands of a single personage. This individual was 
Warad-Nannar, whose many titles make dry read- 
ing but are nevertheless highly significant. He was 
merely the ishakku or prince of some districts; these 
were Lagash (surely after Gudea’s disappearance), 
Zabum, the land Gutebum, the ‘'City of the Divine 
Gimil-Sin,” Hamazi, and Ganhar. Over others he was 
shakkanakku or governor; these included Uzargar- 
shana, Bashime, Timat-Enlil, Urbillum, Ishar, the 
Su(bartu) peoples, and the land Karda.^® 

One region neither Gimil-Sin nor his subordinate 
could conquer. Elam and Anshan might be made 
subject, but an independent state continued to 
flourish in Simash concurrently with the dynasty of 
Ur. In this land Girnamme and Tazitta I had been 
followed by the kings Ebarti and Tazitta IL Enbi- 

37 Statue B, vi 21 IF.; Cylinder A, xvi 7 IF.; cf. SAK^ pp. 70 f. and 106 f. 

3® Thureau-Dangin, “Une inscription d’Arad-Nannar/’ RA^ V (1898- 
1902), 99“io2, and VI, 67 cf. SAK^ pp. 148 ff. 



BABYLONIAN DYNASTS 


luhhan, the succeeding rulers was a contemporary of 
Ur's next and last sovereign, Ibi-Sin.*^'^ 

The accession fin 2207''* of this unfortunate appears 
to have taken place under peaceful circumstances, 
though no one then alive can have believed that Ur 
was still all-powerful. For a time the pretext of its 
former might was maintained, and a ‘'devastation’' 
of Shimurrum ga\’e its name to a year. Likewise a 
mention of the ishakku of Awak, Sharrum-bani, in the 
business documents of the second year and, moreover, 
the occurrence of business documents at Susa dated 
in his second and third years"*^ indicate that Elam 
for a time remained loyal. But then came revolt and 
invasion; and it was the misfortune of Ur that its 
ruler weakened at the very moment when two young 
and vigorous states, Mari and Simash, were attack- 
ing, one from each side. 

From Simash Enbiluhhan moved down into the 
Elamite lowlands and entered Susa. Like a true 
sovereign Ibi-Siii promptly met and worsted the in- 
vader; after his victory he boasted that like a storm 
he had overwhelmed in one day the land Awan and 
the cities Adamdim and Susa and had captured Enbi- 
luhhan or, as he knew him, Enbilua.*^"^ But Simash 
was not to be denied. Her next ruler, Kindattu, again 

39 On the tablet listing the Simash kings, only , . Juhhan is legible; 
the name is completed from the name Enbilua in an inscription of Ibi- 
Sin; see below, 

Mem.^ VoL X, No. 121, and VoL XVIII, No. 79, 

Gadd and Legrain, Royal Inscriptions, Nos. cio f. and 289. 



58 HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 

occupied Susa; and his control was absolute. With 
tactful strategy his first move was the propitiation 
of the local deity, and later scribes tell us that he 
piously restored the temple of Inshushinak.^^ Mean- 
while he had been winning to his side other lands 
formerly under the control of Ur. Thus Huhunuri 
rebelled from Ibi-Sin, who claims its subjection. He 
calls it 'The key to the land Elam/’ but a variant 
text reads "the key to the land Anshan”; and doubt- 
less Kindattu of Simash, who now ruled Anshan and 
Elam, made him pay dearly for his victory. 

The Third Dynasty of Ur was now clearly on the 
defensive; and Ishbi-Irra, the man of Mari, swept 
down from the northwest upon Nippur and advanced 
against Kazallu, whose ishakku fearfully implored aid 
from his suzerain. Indignantly Ibi-Sin replied that 
no one need be in terror; as sovereign he would be 
aided by Enlil and by the Elamites, who were now 
marching toward Ur; his victory over Ishbi-Irra was 
therefore assured. This was a blind faith, and in 

•*2 Scheil, Mem.y III, 56 f. (Nos. 37 and 39). In the lists Kindat(t)u is 
called a son of Tan-Ruhuratir; this is evidently due to confusion with 
Idaddu II in the list of the Simash kings. 

43 The reading of this formula, which appears in Gadd and Legrain, 
Royal Inscriptions^ Nos. ‘290 and 292, has been corrected by Professor 
Poebel. x^ccording to this inscription, Huhunuri or HuHnuri should be 
located east of Eshnunna and Der, on the border of Marhashi or Barahshi. 

44 Barton, Miscellaneous Babylonian Inscriptions (New Haven, 1918), 
No. 9, pp. 57 - 59 ; L. Legrain, Historical Fragments {PBS^ Vol. XIII), 
Nos. 3, 6, and 9; cf. S. Langdon, “Ibi-Sin and the Fall of the Kingdom of 
Ur,” RAy XX (1923), 49-51. A complete tablet of this correspondence 
between Puzur-Numushda and Ibi-Sin, now in the Oriental Institute 
Museum, will be published by Professor Poebel 



BABYLONIAN DYNASTS 5 9 

foreign captivity he had occasion to rue his words. 
The people of Elam^ or rather of Anshan and Simash, 
came to Babylonia^ not to help but to plunder; and 
to Anshan they carried off the last ruler of Ur^ Ibi- 
Sin^ together with his god Nannar (2183 

We do not know what spoil Kindattii reaped from 
his conquest. He can have won little save movable 
property^ for he obtained no land in the alluvium; 
and his name was so quickly lost to posterity that 
the honor of the conquest was denied him and his de- 
struction of Vr ascribed to another. His own dynasty 
continued in Elam and in Simash, but these were far 
removed both culturally and physically from Baby- 


^5" Omen in Boissicr, Cho::': de textes reLuifs d la dlvinanon, I! (Geneva, 
1906), 64; see now Weidner in MAOG^ IV 0928-29), 236, and cf. the 
fragment in King, Cdtahgue of ike Ciineihrm TabL'is . . , . of ike Eriiish 
Museum^ Suppie?nent^ No. 2833. On Nannar cf. the inscription of Cjrimil- 
iiishu cited on p. 6c. A Nippur lament ascribes the capture of Ibi-Sin to 
Elam; cf. Langdon, Hisiorica! and Religions Texts (BE, Ser. A, Vol. 
XXXI;, pp. 6-8. 

It has long been supposed that the capture of Ibi-Sin is refcm‘d to in 
an inscription of Ashurbanipa! of Assyria, w'ho declared that Nana of 
Uruk had been captured by an Elamite, Kudur-Nahhunte, and held 
captive in Susa for 1535 (variant: 1635) years. Kudur-Nahhunte would 
thus be the name of the Elamite w^ho wrought the damage. For such an 
assumption cf. King, History of Sumer a?id Jkkad, pp. 304 f.; Weidner in 
MVAGy XXVi, Heft 2 (1921), 49 f., and again in MAOG, IV (192S-29), 
236; R. C. Thompson in Cambridge Ancient History, I, 471 ; et ai. 

The connection is highly improbable. The new list of Simash kings indi- 
cates that Kindattii ruled Elam at the time of Ur’s fall; despite Scheil, 
“Kutir-Nahhunte F* XXIX (1932), 67-76, a ruler of that name in 
Elam at so early a date is altogether improbable. The first individual of 
that name to appear in Elamite records was approximately contemporary 
with Hammurabi of Babylon. The reference of Ashurbanipa! is far better 
explained in another way; cf- Oimstead, History of Assyria, p. 486^ and 
see below, p, in. 



6o 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


ionia; consequently it found little mention in the 
tangled web of affairs within the Land of the Two 
Rivers. 

With Ibi-Sin's death the tiny city-states of Baby- 
lonia won back that local independence they had en- 
joyed before Lfr gave unity to the land. A little king- 
dom again came into being at Hurshitum^ the modern 
Tuz Khurmatli. There its king^ Puhia, son of Asirum^ 
erected his own palace with bricks inscribed in Ak- 
kadian.-^^ In Ganhar Masiam-Ishtar dedicated a cyl- 
inder seal to his king, Kisari.^^ In Der, a ruler whose 
narrke is lost commemorated by a Sumerian inscrip- 
tion the building of a temple and the restoration of 
the city Der which he loved. Far more important 
than these, however, were the two kingdoms of Isin 
and Larsa. The one was founded by Ishbi-Irra, the 
man of Mari, the other by Naplanum. 

Gimil-ilishu, successor to the founder of the Isin 
dynasty, ruled in Ur also; he tells us that he brought 
back Nannar, the god of Ur, from Anshan/^ Whether 
this was accomplished by force of arms or by diplo- 
macy he does not say, but we surmise the latter. For 

•^^Scheilj ''Notes d’epigraphie,’' RT XVI (1894), 186, and XIX 
(1897), 64; Ungnad, “Vorderasiatische Schriftdenkmaier/’ Heft i (Leip- 
zig, 1907), No. 115; cf. SJKy pp. 172 f. 

Collection Be Ckrcq^ Catalogue, Vol. I, No. 121 and pp. 82 f.; cf. SAK> 
pp. 174 f. 

From a stele carried to Susa as booty by an Elamite, published by 
Scheii, Mim., IV, 3; cf. SAK, pp. 174 f. 

Gadd and Legrain, Royal Inscriptions, No. 100. 



BABYLONIAN DYNASTS 


Kindattu, as king of Simash, had now yielded to 
Idaddu whom we know from his own inscriptions 
as Idadu-Inshushinak, a man of some moment. He 
himself claimed to be a son of Bebi, an individual 
otherwise unknown; but the twelfth century scribes 
of Shilhak-Inshushinakj who included an Idaddu in 
their lists of the earlier kings/® knew him as the 
''descendant'' of Flutran-tepti/* and it is possibly one 
of his year formulas which reads "year when the 
bronze statue of Hutran-tepti was made."^-’ 

In Idaddu's case \ve have the first example of a 
practice frequently to be detected in the later Elamite 
changes of rule, a gradual advancement from a rela- 
tively insignificant position to one of great impor- 
tance, often to royalty itself. The titles of the offices 

These lists, hereafter cited merely as the "iists/ are parts of three 
texts: (ij Mem.y V, *23 f, \No. 71); {2) Mem,, XI, 63 i.No, 95); (3) Mhn.^ 
XI, 64 ff. (Xo. 96;; cf. Hiising, ‘^neikn^ Xo. 4S. 

5^ The sense of the Elamite words ruhii sak, here translated “descend- 
ant,” is still vague; cf. Hiising, ^uellen p. 21. In the Achaemenian in- 
scription of Darius these words are used to translate Old Persian napn, 
“grandson”; but Akkadian texts of the Hammurabi period translate the 
words by indr ahaiim, “son of a sister,” a phrase found again in the Baby- 
lonian Chronicle in the Assyrian period. Xeither of these translations 
seems to be accurate or to agree with the native Elamite texts, w'hich 
appear to justify only the vaguer m.eaning, “descendant.” For specula- 
tions on the meaning of the phrase cf. F. W. Konig, “Mutterrccht und 
Thronfolge im alten Elam,” Festschrift dcr Nationalhiblhthek in lilen 
(1926), pp. 529-52; also P. Koschaker, “Fratriarchat, Hausgemeinschaft 
und Jvlutterrecht in Keilschriftrechten,” ZA^ XL! (1933}, 55, n. 3. 

VoL XXIV, Xo. 3S5. Shiihak-Inshushinak also declared 
that Hutran-tepti restored the temple of Inshushinak in Susa; cf. his 
brick, Mem,^ III, 54 (X’o. 33;. 



62 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


held during this period were those which had been 
borne by the most important figures in Elam during 
the period of the Third Ur Dynasty; although they 
originated in Babylonia, their use in Elam did not in 
the least imply subservience to the lowlands. 

Idadu-Inshushinak very probably began his career 
as ishakku of Susa; he then became both ishakku of 
Susa and shakkanakku of the land Elam. In this office, 
by an Akkadian inscription, he tells of fortifying Susa 
and surrounding it with a rampart, of beautifying 
Kizra, Hubbu, and other parts of Susa, of erecting the 
walls, of the temple on the Susian acropolis, and of de- 
positing therein a limestone water basin to the honor 
of Inshushinak. The curse which he invokes on those 
who may dare to damage his monuments appeals to 
Inshushinak and Shamash, Inanna (or Ishtar) and 
SinP Doubtless this was inscribed while Kindattu 
was still the reigning monarch. Then Idadu-Inshu- 
shinak, as Idaddu I, became king of Simash or, as his 
son called him, king of Simash and Elam.^^ We may 
well hesitate to admit the defeat of a man of this 
caliber at the hands of Gimil-ilishu of Isin. 

Idaddu’s son, Tan-Ruhuratir, likewise began his 
career as ishakku of Susa. Promptly he entered into 
the life and intrigues of Babylonia by marrying 
Mekubi, daughter of Bilalama, ishakku of Eshnunna. 
For safety in her new home Mekubi erected a tem- 

53 Scheil, Mim.y VI, i6-'i9; cf. SAK^ pp. i8o f. 

5 ^ Inscription of Tan-Ruhuratlr in Scheii, Mem*, XIV, 26. 



BABYLOXIAX DYXASTS 




pie to Inanna, the goddess of the Susian acropolis*-" 
Eventually Tan-Ruhuratir became the eighth king 
of Simash (ca. 2145-2125); but bricks of Shilhak- 
Inshushinak^ a thousand years later, attest his con- 
tinued interest in the temple of Inshushinak at 
Susa.'^^' 

The ninth king of Simash was a second Ebarti (ca. 
2125-2115)3 who may likewise have advanced to the 
sovereignty through many intermediate offices* On 
the Susa tablets, however, we have only the year 
formula which he decreed at the time he reached the 
highest office in the land, ‘'year after Ebarti became 
king” 5 " Idaddu II (ca, 2115-2083)3800 of Tan-Ruhu- 
ratir, was more fortunate. He, too, began public life 
as ishakku of Susa, and while serving in this capacity 
he strove persistently to obtain the local deity’s ap- 
proval. Elis own bricks commemorate the construc- 
tion of the wall of ETuanna, the Susian acropolis;^^ 
and other bricks inscribed with duplicate Akkadian 
and Sumerian texts tell how he renovated the old 
walls of the temple with new bricks to the honor of 

Scheii, Mem,^ li, 8o, and IV, 9; now complete in XIV, 24 f.; 

cf. SAK^ pp, iSo f.; Poe be! in AJSL^ XLIX f 1932/33), 137; H. Frank- 
fort, Teii Asmar a7id Kkqfaje ( 0 /C, No. 13}, pp. -25-32. 

Scheii, Mtm.^ HI, 56, and V, 90 (No. 36). The element ta-an of 
names in Mem.^ Vols. XXII-XXIV, shows that the niier’s name was 
Tan {noi Kal or Rip)-Ruhiiratir. 

Scheii, Mem.^ Vol. XXI 11 , Nos. 291-305. 
ss Scheii, Meffhy X, 13; cf. Poebel in AJSLy XLIX 137. 



64 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Inshushinak.^^ His scribe Ishmenni and his servant 
Pudiidu dedicated to him^ as ishakku of Susa^ their 
personal seals; but like kings of the Third Ur Dy- 
nasty he intrusted to his judge, Kuk-Shimut, his own 
royal seaL®° Eventually he, too, was recognized as 
the ruler of Simash, becoming the tenth king of that 
dynasty; and like his predecessor he also employed 
date formulas. One year is dated by the destruction 
of Zidanu; another tells of the devastation of Shindi- 
libbu; a third mentions the erection of a temple to 
Inanna of Uruanna.^"^ Taken all in all, he was a 
monarch of much power and of many conquests. 

Meanwhile a mighty ruler had come to the throne 
of one of the numerous kingdoms within Babylonia. 
For a hundred years after the fall of Ur the pre- 
dominant state in this region was the kingdom of 
Isin. Throughout this period the kings of Larsa en- 
joyed at best a local independence, possibly at times 
admitting vassalage to Isin. The fifth ruler of Larsa, 
Gungunum, was too strong an individual to tolerate 
this condition of affairs; immediately after his ac- 
cession (2087) turned to the northeast for con- 
quest. There Der was still independent under its own 

Sumerian texts: Scheilj Mem,, II, 69, and XIV, 27 f.; Akkadian: 
Mem., II, 72. 

Scheii, MSm., XIV, 28 f.; RA, XXII (1925), 148 f. 

Dossin, Mem., VoL XVIII, Nos. 123 f., 85, and 125; cf. also Nos. 
120-22, *‘year after the tablet-house was built,” and Nos. 84, 127, and 
172, not all of which may, however, belong to Idaddu. I owe these read- 
ings to the kindness of Professor Poebel. Documents 67-68 and 80-197 
in Mem., VoL XVIII, may all be assigned approximately to this period. 



BABYLOMAX DYNASTS 


6 c 

king, now Anumiitabil, who had himself already be- 
gun to expand by sending an ambassador into Esh- 
niinna and bringing to an end the dynasty of Kirikiri 
and Bilalama.^^ Gungunum quickly reduced Anurriu- 
tabil to the status of a skakkanakkUj added the troops 
of Der to those he had brought from Larsa, and pene- 
trated the eastern mountains in his third year to de- 
stroy the city Bashimud'^ This was a direct thrust 
at Idaddu II and the kingdom of Simash. 

We are ignorant of the causes which led to this 
war. Possibly Idaddu himself had once invaded 
Babylonia, and Gungunum was merely underta|^ing 
reprisal. Whatever the case, at the very time when 
the kingdom of Simash was seemingly at the peak of 
its power, this war brought disaster to Elam. Gun- 
giinum’s fifth year is dated by a conquest of Anshan; 
the Akkadian inscription of Anumutabil of Der, his 
subordinate, tells how this shakkanakkii smote the 
heads of the peoples of Anshan, Elam, and Simash, 
and how he destroyed Barahshi.^-^ Idaddu himself, 
the king of Simash, suddenly disappears. 

Frankfort, Tell Jjmar end Khafaje^ pp. 32 t., also Tell 
Khqfaje^ and Kkorsahad fO/C, Xo. ibj, pp. 23-29. 

Date formulas of the Larsa Dynasty gathered by E, M. Grice, 
Chronology of ike Larsa Dynasty (“Yale Oriental Series/* Researches^ 
Vol. R", Part i). An alleged conquest of Zabshalu and the Su(bartu) 
peoples by Ur-Xinurta, apparently documented by Poebei, Historical 
Texis^ p. 138, is now abandoned. Professor Poebelj in an unpublished 
manuscript kindly placed at my disposal, “Zur Geschichte Elams 2ur 
Zeit der Dynastien von Isin, Larsa und Babylon,” has shown that the 
formula is that of the seventh year of Gimil-Sin of Ur. 

Lenormant, Choix de textes cunSiformes^ Xo. 5; cf. SAK^ pp. 176 £; 
T. Jacobsen, “An Unrecognized Text of Ilu-Mutabil/* AJSL^ XLR’ 



66 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


All this happened so rapidly that in later times the 
very scribes of Elam were at a loss. Glibly they gave 
the names of two kings presumed to follow Idaddu II 
on the throne, namely, Idaddu-napir C'ldaddu is 
god’O and Idaddu-temti ("Tdaddu is lord’’)- On this 
point, however, historical method demands a more 
critical attitude. On their very face these names are 
spurious, coined according to the widespread theory, 
prevalent even in Elam, that the ruler himself was a 
deity.^^ Further, as though to disprove the same Ela- 
mite scribes in their patriotic but distorted attempt 
to continue the dynasty, a tablet found at Susa bears 
the year formula of Gungunum’s sixteenth year.^^ 
Obviously, no other explanation is possible than that 
Gungunum of Larsa defeated and killed Idaddu in 
battle and incorporated within his own growing em- 
pire the plain in which lay the city Susa. Thus quick- 
ly the Elamite kingdom collapsed, the Simash dy- 
nasty ceased, and foreign control over a part of Elam 
resulted. 


(1927/28), 261-63; note also the cylinder seal dedicated to Anumutabil, 
shakkanakku of Der, by Bazizzu, his chief priest of Anu, in W. H. Ward, 
Cylinders .... in the Library of J. Pierpont Morgan (New York, 1909), 
No. 68; cf. Scheil in RA^ XIII (1916), 134 f. 

^5 Cf. C. W. McEwan, The Oriental Origin of Hellenistic Kingship 
(SAOC, No. 13). 

Scheii, Mem.^ Vol. X, No. 124; this fact appears to have been hither- 
to unrecognized. 



CHAPTER IV 


DIVINE MESSENGERS OF ELAM, 
SLMASH, AND SUSA 

I N OUR attempt to reconstruct the historical data 
concerning early Iran and Elam we were intro- 
duced to the land by an event told about a re- 
mote king of a Babylonian city, and we have seen 
that in these early times a pow'er mightier than any 
in Sumer seems to have ruled the Elamite highltfnds. 
We have followed the rise of a dynasty of Aw'an con- 
temporary with the kings of Agade and have traced 
the collapse of both before the invading hordes of 
Giitium. We have observed that a dynasty at Ur in 
Babylonia, rising after the bleak years of Giiti rule, 
was paralleled by a dynasty in Elamite Simash, by 
which it was eventually overthrown. Finally, we have 
discovered that the last ruler of Simash was himself 
the captive of a Babylonian sovereign and that Elam 
once more bowed to a warring invader. We are now 
to see a proud Elamite in possession of Babylonian 
territory, even w’hile his own Elam was saturated 
through and through with Babylonian culture. 

A mighty struggle began in Babylonia about the 
middle of the twenty-first millennium. New peoples, 
filtering in from Syrian Amurru, had already brought 

67 



68 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


a disposition to quarrel with any and all comers; and 
when three new monarchs in one year rose to power, 
each determined to rule supreme, trouble might well 
be anticipated. In 2050 b.c. Gungunum’s successor 
gave place to Sumu-ilum in Larsa, Bur-Sin II came to 
the throne in Isin, and the First Dynasty of Babylon 
began under Sumu-abum. Early in his fourth year 
Sumu-ilum combated the Amorite tribes settled in 
Akuz and Kazallu; in his eighth he attempted to sub- 
jugate Ka-ida, the “Mouth of the Rivers.” Success 
was apparently denied him, or at least he failed to re- 
tain his conquests, for Sumu-abum was compelled to 
attack Kazallu only five years later.^ From events 
such as these we may safely conclude that the land 
was in turmoil and confusion. 

The exploits of one individual form a brief interlude 
in these years, for Ilu-shuma of Ashur may have in- 
vaded Babylonia in the time of Sumu-abum. His own 
inscription claims that he brought freedom to Ur and 
Nippur, which were nominally at least under the con- 
trol of Larsa; if the granting of freedom be taken to 
mean freedom from taxes, the inscription must be 
understood definitely to imply invasion. He entered 
the lands east of the Tigris also, for he asserts that he 
freed Awal, Kismar, and Der of the god Sataran; the 

^ Date formulas of the First Dynasty of Babylon, in M. Schorr, Ur- 
kunden des allbahy fonts chen ZiviU und Prozessrechts (“Vorderasiatische 
Bibliothek,” Vol. V), pp. 582-609. See also Reallexikon der Assyriologie, 
II, 164 £ 



DIVIXE MESSENGERS 


69 


warrior must almost have reached Elamite territory/ 
X’evertheless, the claim of this ruler stands as an iso- 
lated statement; there are no other historical data to 
deny or to confirm it. Whatever may have been IIu- 
shiima's achievement, it had no enduring result. 

The history of Babylonia during the next few years 
is marked by the attempts of two rulers to combat, 
regain, or control Kazailii east of the Tigris where 
Amorites had entered. Sumu-ilum of Larsa smote the 
district in his twenty-second year (2028 b.c.). A dec- 
ade later the Babylonian Sumu-la-ilum began an 
eight- year contest with the Amorite lahzer-iii, whom 
he drove from the city. We may suspect that* the 
fugitive did not remain away permanently, for two 
years later the walls of Kazallu had to be destroyed, 
and lahzer-ili was not declared officially dead until 
five years after this date. 

Such disturbances within Babylonia once more 
gave complete freedom to Elam. There a new dynas- 
ty came into power, a dynasty which lasted as long 
as the far-famed First Dynasty of Babylon and which 
was almost equally important. 

The first king of this line, Ebarti {ca, 2020-2001), 
is given no genealogy in the lists of Shilhak-Inshii- 
shinak. That he was not in a position of great impor- 
tance before his accession is suggested by a seal of his 

* Cf. Ebeling, Meissner, and Weidner, Die Ijischriften der atassyrbcken 
Konige (Leipzig, 1926), pp. 6-9; on the dating cf. King, Ckronicks Con-- 
ceming Early Babylonian Kings^ 11 , 14. 



HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


70 

servant Gimii-Bau which marks him as a private in- 
dividual; then a seal of the servant of his son Kuk- 
tanra designates him as king/ and his full titie^ ''King 
of Anzan and Susa/’-^ appears. He seems to be men- 
tioned in a Babylonian omen text/ and the reason is 
not far to seek: he was the father of Shilhaha/ better 
known as Shimti-Shilhak, who is widely heralded as 
the father of Kudur-Mabuk.' 

The exploits of Shilhaha {ca, 2000-1986), or rather 
of Shimti-Shilhak, are unknown to us, although they 
must have been noteworthy. Generation after gener- 
ation traced back to him its ancestry, and his building 
activities on the temples of Nannar and Inshushinak 
in Susa were long remembered.^ He it was who made 
the suzerain of greater Elam the lordly superior of 
the petty kings in local districts. Henceforth the high- 
est title in the land — and Shilhaha himself received it 

3 Scheii in RA^ XXII (1925), 158-60, taken in part from Documents 4, 
7, and 40 of Mem.y Vol. X. 

^From the Addahushu inscription; cf. Scheii, “Inscription d’Adda- 
Baksu/ RA^ XXVI (1929), 1-7, Ebarti also built at the Inshushinak 
temple in Susa according to bricks of Shilhak-Inshushinak; cf. Mem,^ 
III, 55 (No. 34) and 59 (No. 44; cf. Mem,, V, 91). 

3 Cf. Weidner in MAOG, IV (1928/29), 239 n. 

^ So according to the lists. 

7 Shimti-Shilhak would be the Babylonian pronunciation of the Elam- 
ite name Temti-Shilhak; the t is reproduced by s as it was in the name 
Hishep-ratep, which the Old Akkadian (Sargonid) scribes rendered by 
Hiship-rashir. That Shimti is also the Kassite shimdi (equated with 
nadanu, “to give”) is improbable, loxtemti (upA) means “lord.” 

® Nannar inscription of Addahushu, above, n. 4; Shilhak-Inshushi- 
nak bricks, Mem,, III, 53 (No. 32). 



DRIXE MESSENGERS 


— ^was sukkatmah^ ^‘exalted messenger/' Since this 
tide was of more importance than ‘‘king/' it must 
refer to the ruler's relationship to the gods, and we 
might therefore translate it by “divine messenger" or 
even “angel"! Shilhaha also instituted the use of an- 
other title, adda^ “father"; doubtless this refers to the 
sovereign’s relationship to his subjects. Its use has 
puzzled many a historian of Babylonia through its 
adoption by Shilhaha’s own son, Kudur-Mabuk. A 
third title, “king," would have marked a man as 
mighty in Babylonia; this signified little in Elam, 
where Shilhaha was only incidentally “King qf An- 
zan and Susa/’*'^ 

Along with the additional epithets adda and “king" 
hereafter employed by the supreme ruler, the latter 
might equally treasure the titles '^sukkal of Elam and 
Simash" and '"siikkal of Susa," for he himself had 
once held these offices. As such they w^ere, however, 
strictly subordinate to the title stikkalmahy as the 
word sukkalj “minister," “plenipotentiary," shows; 
and, since Susa w^as an Akkadianized city, its sukkal 
was the least important of the realm. Nevertheless, 
even he might expect greater power, for Shilhaha re- 
stored the step-by-step policy of throne succession 
already noted in earlier periods. Upon the death of 
the sukkalmah it appears that the sukkal of Elam and 
Simash himself became sukkalmah; the sukkal of Su- 
sa, who was often locally known as the king of Susa, 

9 The full titulary is given in the Addahushu inscription, on which 
see the preceding note. 



72 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


advanced to the office of sukkal of Elam and Simash. 
A new sukkal of Susa was thereupon chosen^ probably 
by the sukkalmah^ for it would seem that the new sub- 
ordinate was almost invariably a member of the su- 
preme ruler’s own family. At any rate, the fortunate 
individual may often have been a minor, for by such 
a choice the sukkalmah would retain the imperial 
power with less risk to his own life. 

Our information about the period is secured largely 
from business documents of Susa. A few other texts, 
written perhaps during the early reigns, have been 
found in a place known today as Malamir, a hundred 
miles to the southeast.^^ These, though important from 
the economic standpoint, add little to our knowledge 
of the political situation throughout the ensuing cen- 
turies. The tablets from both sites are written in di- 
alectic Akkadian strongly impregnated with Elamite 
elements. During the early part of the period the per- 
sonal names are for the most part Elamite. As time 
passes, the names tend more and more to become 
purely Akkadian, although the names of the months 
and titles of professions often remain in the native 
tongue. 

Some of the Susian texts from the first part of the 
period are temple documents,^® receipts for sheep and 

5 ^ The Malamir texts, first published in Mem,, IV, 169 fF., are re- 
translated in MSm.^ Vol. XXIL 

MSm.^ X, 14-80, Nos. 1-120 and 122 f. Personal names indicate 
that many of these documents are contemporary with Ebarti, the first 
ruler of the dynasty. Note the year formulas in Nos. 69, 75, and 98. 



DIVIXE MESSENGERS 


oxen destined for the palace of the sukkal and for 
sacrifices to the deities. The latter contributions usu- 
ally go to Inshushinak or to Inanna, the lady of the 
acropolis^ to whom sacrifices were sometimes oitered 
in the palace of the sukkaL Other recipients of such 
gifts are Shimiitj X’ahhunte, Nergal, Enki or £^3 and 
Xin-egalj the lady of the palace. Place names in these 
documents include Zabzalu^ better known as Zabsha- 
lu, from which a messenger came to Susa, and Simash, 
Ashgiipe, Gurumiitakj Lahrin (perhaps the later 
Lahiru), Zaban, and Dur Shulgi. 

The majority of the later texts are simple memo- 
randa of rents and mortgages, sales and exchanges, 
wills and documents of administration, and adoption 
records.” They are not unlike those of the same pe- 
riod which have been discovered in Babylonia; never- 
theless, the language, as has already been remarked, 
is greatly influenced by the Elamite currently spoken, 
and some features show customs at variance with 
those practiced in the lowlands.” 

More important from the standpoint of interna- 
tional and local history are the data these texts fur- 
nish us for a study of the chronology of the period. In 
Elam, as in all other ancient lands, the curse was an 
effective weapon. No less powerful was the invoca- 

Mem,, Vols. XXII-XXIV, Nos. 1-395, some of which w'ere first 
published in Mhn., Vol. XVIII. 

Cf. E. Cuq, “Les actes juridiques susiens,’' RJ, XXVIII (1931), 
47-71, and “Le droit elamite/’ RJ, XXIX (1932), 149-S2. 



74 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


tion of a mighty deity; and, since the ruler was the 
god’s representative upon earth, the practice of 
swearing to the truth of a statement by the name of 
the local chief or the supreme sovereign was in high 
favor. Consequently the gods Inshushinak and Ish- 
mekarab were often called upon by the contracting 
parties at Susa; at Malamir the goddess Shalla, the 
Hurrian Shala, alone or with her suzerain, Inshushi- 
nak, was frequently invoked. Fortunately for the 
historian, in place of the deity the name of a more 
earthly ruler is sometimes mentioned; thus in the Su- 
sian texts the sukkal of the city is often named, to- 
gether with one of his more potent overlords, the 
sukkal of Elam and Simash or the sukkalmah. This 
type of invocation in the documents has shed so much 
light on the internal political situation of Elam 
throughout this period that the lists of the land’s 
rulers compiled by Elam’s own Shilhak-Inshushinak 
can often be proved inadequate and in one or two in- 
stances can actually be corrected. 

Thus today we may discover a fact which was ap- 
parently unknown to the twelfth-century antiquari- 
an, namely, that at the time Shilhaha or Shimti-Shil- 
hak was the sukkalmah of Elam his subordinates were 
Shirukduh as the sukkal of Elam and Simash and 
Shimut-wartash as the sukkal of Susa.'^ The lists tell 

Cf. the table on p. 2.29. The seal of Documents 242 and 325 
Voi. XXIII) apparently names the first four sukkalmah*s: Shilhaha, 
Shirukduh, Siwepalarhuppak, and Kuduzulush. Mem,^ Vol. XXIV, No. 



DIVINE MESSENGERS 


us that the former was a ‘"descendant” of Shilhaha; 
we would expect as much, for Shiihaha seems to have 
revived this scheme of succession and would naturally 
place a relative upon the minor throne. Shiniut-war- 
tash^ though ruler of Susa, left his own inscription on 
the island Liyan, where he dedicated to the goddess 
Kiririsha a votive cylinder."-^ 

In Babvlonia it was not Shilhaha but his son Ku- 
dur-Mabiik who became famous. This Fllamite, en- 
tering the lowlands about 1995 b.c., made himself at 
home in Emutbal, the district around Larsa, and 
threatened the independence of this sovereign city. 
His own inscription actually proclaimed him the 
‘‘father” of Emutbal This was a title borrowed from 
Elam; it was of more honor than “king,” yet of less 
prestige than sukkalmah. As we have seen, it had been 
employed by his own father, Shilhaha, but as used by 
the son it designated his subservience to the supreme 
ruler of all Elam, the sukkahfiah. 

Sin-iqisham was just beginning his reign at Larsa 
and could ill afford such a challenge to his power. He 
began the offensive the following year by an attack on 
Ka-ida and Nazarum.^^ In retaliation Kudur-Mabiik 


346, however, shows Shirukduh supreme over Shimuc-wartash {sukkai 
of Elam and Simashj and over Siwepalarhuppak (s^dka/ of Susa). Nos. 
87, 22 j £, and 246 invoke the name of Shim ut- war tash alone, probably as 
sukkai of Susa. 

M, Pezard, Mem,^ XV, 91 f. 

Gadd and Legrain, Royal Inscriptions^ No. 266. 



76 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


sought alliance with Isin, where Zambia came to the 
throne in Sin-iqisham’s fifth year. In that year the 
latter claimed the defeat of Elam and Zambia;’^*' we 
may doubt the veracity of the claimant, for before the 
year was out he was supplanted by Silli-Adad, and 
the new king at his accession appears humble indeed. 
He calls himself the nourisher of Nippur, the ishakku 
of Ur, Larsa, Lagash, and Kutaila;"^ but these are 
scarcely royal epithets, and it is quite possible that 
Silli-iAdad was vassal to the Elamite. When he dared 
call himself “king” in the date formulas, he was at 
once deposed and Warad-Sin, Kudur-Mabuk’s own 
son, was placed on the throne (1989 b.c.). 

For a few years the son was nominal ruler, and the 
date formulas are in his name; the father was, how- 
ever, in actual control. The second year is dated by 
an invasion of Kazallu and its neighboring district 
Mutiabal.*® Zabum of Babylon reports a conquest of 
Kazallu in the same year. This is significant, for it 
may mean that Zabum was allied with the Elamite to 
meet a common danger, or that he was actually a 
vassal of the foreigner. The latter is probably the 
more accurate picture, for Kudur-Mabuk himself re- 
lates how he massacred the armies of Kazallu and 
Mutiabal in Larsa and Emutbai and how he guaran- 
teed the existence of battle-scarred Kazallu, although 

Ibid.; also in Grice, Records from Ur and Larsa (“Yale Oriental 
Series,” Babylonian Texts ^ Vol. V), p. 20. 

Gadd and Legrain, op. cit.^ No. 121. 


No. 266. 



DIVINE MESSENGERS 77 

he destroyed its walls/^ Again in this inscription the 
Elamite declares himself the adda of his subjects; this 
time he is adda of Amurru, meaning doubtless the 
Amorite peoples whom he had just conquered in 
Kazallu and MutiabaL 

For five years of Warad-Sin’s reign in Larsa the 
royal inscriptions are all from the hand of Kudur- 
Mabiik. Finally Warad-Sin is alone when he dedi- 
cates a sanctuary to Inanna of Hallab for his own life 
and for the life of his father.-® Why Kudur-Mabuk 
should disappear so suddenly is a puzzle that needs 
unraveling. Possibly he was recalled to Elam by the 
death of his father, Shilhaha, although the automatic 
succession of Shirukduh to the office of sukkalmak 
and Shimut-wartash to the position of sukkal of Elam 
and Simash hardly required his presence. Perhaps he 
was needed in Elam to assist in the naming of the new 
sukkal of Susa, Siwepalarhuppak,^^ although the right 
to designate the Susa subordinate probably belonged 
solely to the new^ sukkalmak. At any rate, through- 
out the remainder of Warad-Sin’s twelve-year reign 
in Larsa the son wms left in full charge, and Kudur- 
Vlabuk reappears only with the accession of his sec- 

Thureau-Dangin, “Une inscription de Kudur-Mabuk,*’ RA^ IX 
(1912), 121-24; cf. now Barton, RISA^ pp. 324 f. 

CTy XXI, 31 f.; cf. SJKy pp. 214 ff. 

Shirukduh over Shimut-wartash and Siwepaiarhuppak: Mem.y Yol. 
XXIV, No. 346; Shirukduh over Siwepaiarhuppak: Mem,, Vol. XXI i. 
Nos. 62 and 134 { = Mem.y Vol. XVIII, No. 201). The name of the new 
Susa official is probably to be divided thus: Siwe-palar-huppak. 



78 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


ond sorij Rim-Sin^ in this city.^^ Again he is titled 
adda of Emutbal; and he is even more closely asso- 
ciated with Rim-Sin than he had been with Warad- 
Sin^ for father and son now make joint dedications 
for their own lives.^^ Then Kudur-Mabuk again dis- 
appears; and Rim-Sin^ whose reign of sixty-one years 
shows that he must have been a mere child at his ac- 
cession^ makes the dedications alone. 

There is no information concerning the reign of 
Shirukduh {ca, 1985-1966)3 although it would seem 
that his subordinate ruler of Simash and Elamj Shi- 
mut-wartash3 died in office and that Siwepalarhuppak 
advanced to this position while Kuduzulush I became 
the new sukkal of Susa. Then with the death of Shi- 
rukduh the accession appears to have moved forward 
quite regularly; Siwepalarhuppak became sukkalmah 
{ca, 1965-1946)3 with Kuduzulush as his sukkal of 
Elam and Simash3 and Kutir-Nahhunte^^ as the new- 
ly chosen sukkal of Susa.^^ The new sukkalmah him- 

The picture of the Babylonian situation here presented was made 
possible only by the assistance of Professor Olmstead, who in an unpub- 
lished manuscript has examined the sources for the period and com- 
pared the date formulas with the relevant royal inscriptions- The number 
of the Larsa date formulas has recently been increased by the publication 
of text No. 266 in Gadd and Legrain, Royal Inscriptions, 

23 Lenormant, Choix de textes cunSiJormes^ No. 70; cf. SAKy pp. 218-21. 

^‘^Nahhunte is the proper spelling of this deity’s name in the twelfth 
century; for the sake of consistency, in this name as in others, minor 
variations in spelling have been disregarded in this work. 

25 Siwepalarhuppak over Kuduzulush: MSm.y VoL XXII, No. 63; 
VoL XXIII, No. 200; VoL XXIV, No. 346, note; cf. also Vol. XXII, No. 
64; Kuduzulush over Kutir-Nahhunte: Mem.y Vol. XXIII, No. 201. 



DiMXE messp:ngers 


seif left no extant inscriptions, but centuries later he 
was named as the first of Susa’s ruiers to bring a cer- 
tain precious wood to U!puhshi-igi-balap, where sub- 
sequent sovereigns could transport it to the capita! 
and the scribes of Shilhak-lnshiishinak knew that he 
had restored Inshiishinak’s temple on the acropolis. 

Meanwhile in Babylonia Elam’s descendant Rim- 
Sin appeared to be making remarkable headway. In 
his fifteenth year he became embroiled with the peo- 
ples of Ifruk, Isin, Babylon, Rapiqum, and Sutium 
and claims to have come out the victor. Fifteen years 
later (1947; his conquest of Isin was a genuine tri-* 
umph, and he seemed to be well on the way to the 
control of the lowlands. He reckoned without Ham- 
murabi, who came to Babylon’s throne in that very 
year. This intrepid lawgiver began almost immedi- 
ately a policy of expansion; he attacked Malgiiim in 
his fourth and tenth years, plundered Rim-Sin’s re- 
cent conquest, Isin, in his seventh, and entered Emiit- 
bal or Larsa’s own territory in his eighth. By 1918 
Rim-Sin w^as hard-pressed; quite naturally he ap- 
pealed to his ancestral Elam, where perhaps Ivudiizii- 
lush I was now tht sukkahnah (ca, 1945"-I9i8). Most 
unwisely the Elamites answ^ered the appeal. Using 
Marhashi or Barahshi as their base, they attacked 
Subartum, Gutium, Eshnunna, and Maigiumd® Their 

Inscription of Shntruk-Xahhunte; see below, pp. ic6 L 

Mem.y III, 58, and V, 91 (No. 41). 

This formula, fragmentary in PoebeL BahyioKum Legal and Business 
Docunmiis Ser. A, Vol. VI, Part 2}, p. 62, is now complete in Lang- 



8o 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


defeat by the army of Hammurabi meant not only 
Rim-Sin’s loss of his kingdom in the following year^, 
when the ruler of Babylon swept through Larsa; it 
meant not only Elam’s loss of prestige in foreign 
countries; the attempted succor brought about the 
collapse of the empire in Elam and the overthrow of 
the regime. Although no foreigner invaded the land, 
the defeat in Babylonia was apparently so severe that 
Elam fell a prey to its own internal conflicts. At any 
rate, we know little of its history for almost seventy 
years. 

One ruler only emerges with a certain degree of 
clarity. This is Addahushu, who declared himself a 
son of a sister of Shilhaha and whose reign, if reign it 
was, appears to have been recognized in Susa only. 
He was, in fact, denied an ofiicial title in most of his 
inscriptions, merely claiming to be the shepherd of 
the people of Susa or of Inshushinak. His deeds in- 
cluded the erection of a temple for the god Narute 
and a bridge for Inshushinak.^^ Further, a district 


don, “Oxford Editions of Cuneiform Texts/’ II, 31 ; I owe the corrected 
reading of the formula to Professor Poebel. 

In connection with the often assumed, but probably erroneous, identi- 
fication of Hammurabi with Amraphel, it may here be stated that the 
name Chedorlaomer of Genesis, chapter 14, would obviously be Kudur- 
Lagamar in Elamite, but that no ruler named Kudur-Lagamar has yet 
come to light, 

Mem,^ VI, 26; IV, 10; cf. SAK^ pp. 182 fi There is no way of evalu- 
ating the inscription of Tetep-mada, who also bore the curious title 
“shepherd of Susa, son of a sister of Shilhaha”; cf. Scheil, “Un prince 
susien nouveau,” RA^ XXIV (1927), 41. 



DIVIXE MESSENGERS 


was named for him, and a tablet with a seal impres- 
sion of a servant of his points to the use of date for- 
mulas, for it bears the date ''year of 
He, too, finally attained the coveted position of suk- 
ka! of Susa, and in this oitice dedicated anew the 
temple of Nannar in commemoration of the first two 
rulers of the dynasty: Ebarti, the King of Anzan and 
Susa; and Shilhaha, the siikkdlmak^ the adda^ the 
King of Anzan and Siisa.-'^ 

We are ignorant of the events which permitted 
reorganization of a stable kingdom. Perhaps around 
1850 the same Kutir-Nahhiinte who as a mere qhild 
had been sakkal of Susa more than sixty years before 
revived the type of government which had been popu- 
lar in the days of his fathers. As his subordinates he 
chose Tata, whose full name was Atta-merra-halki, 
to be sukkal of Elam and Simash, and Temti-agun to 
be sukkal of Susa.'^- The latter, calling himself a son 
of a sister of Shiriikduh, wrote an inscription in Ak- 
kadian; that royal documents should be written in a 
foreign language shows how great had been the pene- 
tration of Semitic influences at Susa in the years im~ 

Dimtu-Addahushii^ Mem,^ VoL X, Nos. 72 and 75; date formula, 
Mem.y Voi. X, No. 2 (cf., however, No. 21 ). 

Schell, “Inscription d’.^dda-Baksu,” RJ^ XXVI (19-9), 1-7. For 
Shiihak-Inshushinak bricks mentioning this ruler cf. Ill, 55 (No. 

3S)- 

32 Kutir-Nahhunte over Temti-agun: Mem., VoL XXII, Nos. 131 
and 157; VoL XXIII, Nos. 2c2f.; VoL XXIV, Nos. 347, 368, 374-78, 
382 bis, and 392. Tata, sukkal over Temti-agun: Mem., VoL XXIV, No. 
391; cf. also Mem., Vol. XXIII, No. 321 ; VoL XXIV, Nos. 379 and 383. 



82 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


mediately preceding. The text dedicates a temple to 
Ishmekarab, the deity so frequently invoked in the 
business records^ for the life of the sukkalmah Kutir- 
Nahhunte and for the lives of the members of his own 
family.^^ Also in Akkadian, and likewise for the life 
of Kutir-Nahhunte, Temti-agun dedicated a temple 
and several statues to Inshushinak by a text which 
has been fully preserved only in a copy made seven 
hundred years later by Shilhak-Inshushinak, who 
added in Elamite his own interpretation of its mean- 

ing.34 

T-emti-agun in time became sukkal of Elam and 
Simash, perhaps through the premature death of Ta- 
ta, with Kutir-Shilhaha as the new appointee in Susa. 
Then Temti-agun became the supreme ruler {ca. 
1840-1826), with Kutir-Shilhaha and Kuk-Nashur I 
in the lesser positions. The latter was a son of a sis- 
ter of Temti-agun, or so he claimed to be, when, as 
sukkal of Susa, he granted land to a favorite of his 
court. When time raised Kutir-Shilhaha to the ojfHce 

33 Namely, Lila-ir-tash, Temti-hisha-hanesh, and Pilki, his hashduk 
mother; the phrase should perhaps be rendered “revered (or ^honored') 
mother.” The inscription is published in Mim.^ VI,' 23; cf. SAK^ pp. 
184 f.; F. W. Konig in Festschrift der Nationalbihliothek in Wien^ p. 542. 

34 Mem,, VI, 25; cf. Scheil in RA, XXIX (1932), 69-71. For a text of 
Shilhak-Inshushinak referring to Kutir-Nahhunte, Temti-agun, and 
Akkad see ibid., pp. 71-75; Pere Scheil’s dating must be rejected. 

33 Temti-agun, sukkalmah over Kuk-Nashur: Mem,, Vol. XXIII, 
No. 167; cf. also Nos. 204 f. and 325, Kutir-Shilhaha over Kuk-Nashur; 
Mem., Vol. XXIII, No. 210. 

Mim., Vol. XXIII, No. 283. 



DIVINE MESSENGERS 


of sukkalmak ica. Kuk-Nashur, himseif 

now sukkal of Elam and Simash^ again conferred land 
upon his favorited' He was no longer under the neces- 
sity of honoring his dead relative^ and in this docu- 
ment Kuk-Nashur traces his ancestry back beyond 
Temti-ao-im and beyond Temti-agiin's alleged '‘an- 
cestor” Shirukduh to Shirukduh’s "ancestor” Shii- 
haha or Shimti-Shiihak; thus he too became another 
of the ‘‘sons of a sister of Shiihaha” so well known to 
the compilers of later lists. 

For a time the new sukkal of Susa under Kutir- 
Shilhaha appears to have been Shirtuh.'"^ He claiijied 
to have been a son of a sister of Kuk-Nashur j his im- 
mediate superior, when, like his alleged relative, he 
granted land to one of his own courtiers. Perhaps 
he presumed too much upon his masters, for he soon 
disappeared and Temti-raptash became the sukkal or 
king of Susad® 

Finally Kuk-Nashur became sukkalmak (1810™ 
1800). Although Temti-raptash and a second Kudii- 
zulush were his nominal underlings,*^' he himself 

57 MSm., VoL XXIII, No. 2S2. 

5* Kutir-Shilhaha over Shirtuh, king of Susa: VoL XXii, 

No. 18; cf. also VoL XXIH, No. '2ii. Kuk-Nashur over Shirtuh: Uf/w., 
VoL XXIIj No. 137. 

39 Mem., VoL XXIII, No. 284. 

Kutir-Shilhaha, sukkalmak over Temti-raptash, king of Susa: 
Mem., VoL XXII, Nos. 10 and 133; VoL XXIII, No. 169; cf. also VoL 
XXII, No. 1 17, and VoL XXIII, Nos. 212-14. 

^ Temti-raptash over Kuduzulush: Mini., VoL XXII, Nos. S and 116; 
VoL XXIII, No. 183; VoL XXIV, Nos. 341, 345, and 393. Kuk-Nashur 



HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


proudly enumerated all the titles he had won in the 
course of his career. As the sukkalmah, sukkal of 
Elam, Simash, and Susa, he continued to bestow 
crown lands upon his favorites; to Shukshu and Mahi- 
si of the city Humman he granted land extending 
from Hutekuk to Huteshekin,'*'* from Asirsir to Hit- 
puli,'*^ and from Manhashhur to Shumahani. This 
document is important not only for its text and ac- 
companying map; perhaps because the land given 
was situated near Babylonia, the charter received the 
current Babylonian year date, the first year of Am- 
mizaduga, which shows that the document was com- 
posed in i8oi B.c.'*'' To the god of Susa Kuk-Nashur 
was no less kind. One inscription reports the dedica- 
tion of his sanctuary;-"® another, which describes the 
erection of a temple inclosure, like the text of Temti- 
agun was recopied by scribes of the twelfth century 
and so was preserved for posterity.'"® Kuk-Nashur 


over Kuduzulush: Mim.^ Vol. XXII, Nos. 32, 36 f., 67, and 86; Vol. 
XXIII, Nos. 195 and 215; VoL XXIV, No. 340. In Vol. XXII, No. 160, 
Kuk-Nashur is called sukkal of Elam when Kuduzulush is king of Susa; 
this is not in accord with the scheme as here presented, although I can 
see no better solution to the difficulty. 

42 In Elamite hute means merely “site,** “place.** 

43 *The river Puli.’* 

44 Text copied by Ungnad in “Vorderasiatische Schriftdenkmaler,” 
Vol VII, No. 67; cf. Ungnad in BAy VI, Heft 5 (1909), 1-5, and restore 
with the help oiMim.y Vol. XXIII, No. 282. 

45 Scheil, MSm.y V, xii, republished in Mem.y VI, 28 ; cf. SAKy pp. 1 84 f. 

Scheil in RAy XXIX (1932), 68. 



DIVINE MESSENGERS 


85 


was evidently a powerful monarch; it was the irony of 
fate that the same scribes who so faithfully copied his 
text after many centuries confused him with a second 
Kuk-Nashur, a ‘"descendant” of Tan-Uli. 

The succeeding reign of Temti-raptash {ca. 1799- 
1791)3 who may have controlled Kuduzulush II and 
Tan-Uli^” as subordinateSj would seem to have been 
uneventful^ although the large number of economic 
documents which belong to his time may indicate an 
increased amount of business activity in Susa.-^® Like- 
wise there is no additional information concerning the 
years of Kuduzulush II (ca, 1790-1781)3 although it 
is certain that he too became sukkalmah,^^ His sub- 
ordinates would seem to have been Tan-Uli and Tem- 
ti-halki.s® As sukkal of Susa the latter individual, by 

47 Although Pere Scheil has published a seal of Puzur-Mazat, son of 
Tan-Uli, in RA, XXII (1925), 149 f., this individual need not be a son of 
the king, for the name Tan-Uli is borne by private individuals in the busi- 
ness documents; see the indexes of Mim,^ Vols. XXII-XXIV. 

In addition to those cited above, Mem., Vol. XXII, No. loi, and 
Vol. XXIII, Nos. 2 1 8-20 and 240, invoke the name of Temti-raptash 
alone; Vol. XXIII, No. 315, connects Temti-raptash with a shakkanak- 
ku, but this does not indicate the ruler’s relationship to a Babylonian 
king. 

Vol. XXIII, No. 179. The scribe of this document also 
wrote Nos. 216 and 219 f., dated to Temti-raptash, and No, 222, dated to 
Shimut-wartash. Unless the latter is the second of the name, mention of 
him at this time is at present an unexplainable fact. 

Tan-Uli, sukkal over Temti-halki: Mem,, Vol. XXIII, No. 177 
(and, doubtfully, No. 186). Tan-Uli over Temti-halki: Mem,, VoL 
XXII, Nos. 20 and 113; Vol. XXIII, Nos. 171 and 247; Vol. XXIV, 
Nos. 839 } 3.nd 369; cf. also Vol. XXII, No. ii; Vol. XXIII, 

Nos. 188 and 196; Vol. XXIV, No. 370. 



86 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


an Akkadian inscription in which he employs merely 
the title ''king/' dedicated a temple to "Inshushinak, 
the king of the gods/' an epithet wrongly interpreted 
in our own day to obtain the name of a sovereign, 
"Inshushinak-shar-ilani."^^ When Tan-Uli became 
sukkalmah {ca, 1780-1771), Temti-halki was elevated 
to the office of sukkal of Elam and Simash according 
to the usual scheme, and Kuk-Nashur II became the 
new ruler in Susa.^^ Owing to an error of the Elamite 
antiquarians, this Kuk-Nashur was confused with the 
first of the name, and in memory of his supposed 
deeds several bricks were inscribed in the twelfth 
century b.c. Today we may correct the mistake and 
distinguish the individuals without too great condem- 
nation of the later scribes. 

Unfortunately, we have no data on Tan-Uli; but 
when Temti-halki in turn became sukkalmah^ he, like 
others before him, rejoiced in the full titulary when 
he dedicated a temple to the chief deity of Susa. 
Again writing in Akkadian, he tells us that, like Kuk- 
Nashur I, he was a ^'son of a sister of Shilhaha."^^ 
Though eventually his titulary was forgotten, his 

SI Scheii, Mim.y II, 120. 

Tan-Uli, sukkalmah over Temti-halki: Mem.^ Vol. XXII, Nos. 7 
and 9; Vol. XXIII, No. 173; Vol. XXIV, Nos. 338 and 353. Tan-Uli 
over Kuk-Nashur; MSm., Vol. XXII, No. 102; Vol. XXIII, No. 178. 
In Vol. XXIII, No. 206, Tan-Uli is called the sukkal over Kuk-Nashur; 
this too is not explainable at present. Temti-halki, sukkal over Kuk- 
Nashur: Mem., Vol. XXIII, Nos. 208 f.; cf. also Vol. XXII, No. 85. 

Mem., II, 77 f.; cf. SJK, pp. 1841. Temti-halki bears the curious 
title ""^sukkalmah of Elam and Simash” in the text of Mem., VI, 27; cf. 
SAK, he. cit. Doubtless this is an oversight of the scribe. 



DIVINE MESSENGERS 87 

deed was commemorated six hundred years later by 
Shilhak-Inshushinak.^-^ 

Incomplete and confused sources deprive us of the 
names of Temti-halki’s successors. Were our materi- 
als complete^ we might still find many gaps^ for 
Elam’s involved scheme of succession surely invited 
assassination. One other “son of a sister of Shilhaha” 
came into prominence^ possibly before, but more 
probably after, Temti-halki. This was Kuk-Kirwash. 
We first meet him as a minor official, perhaps sukkal 
of Susa, under Bala-ishshan,^^ of whom it was later 
said that he, like Siwepalarhuppak, brought precious- 
woods to the Susa temple.^^ Kuk-Kirwash in turn, 
probably as sukkal of Elam and Simash, had as his 
subordinate Tem-Sanit, whose early death seems to 
have brought Kuk-Nahhunte to the Susian office. 
Finally he reached the summit of his political ambi- 
tions and became sukkalmah^ having Kuk-Nahhunte 
and a third Kuk-Nashur as subordinates.^^ In the 
now antiquated Sumerian he tells how he restored a 
temple in Susa and surrounded it with a new wall.^^ 

54 Scheil, Mem., Ill, 57 (No. 38). 

ss Bala-ishshan over Kuk-Kirwash: Mem., Vol. XXIV, Nos. 348 i.; 
cf. Scheil in RA, XXIX (1932), 76. 

5 ^ Shutruk-Nahhunte inscription ; see below, pp. 106 f. For the seal of a 
scribal servant of Bala-ishshan cf. Scheil, ‘^Cylindre Pala i§§an,” RA, 
XXIII (1926), 36. 

57 Kuk-Kirwash over Tem-Sanit: Mem., Vol. XXIV, No, 351; over 
Kuk-Nahhunte: Mem., Vol. XXIV, No. 352. 

5 * Kuk-Nahhunte over Kuk-Nashur (written “Nashir”): Mem., Vol. 
XXIV, Nos. 329 f. 

59 Scheil, Mem., II, 74-76; cf. SAK, pp. 182 f. 



88 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Had we other original texts of this '‘descendant” of 
ShilhaliEj perhaps we could discover his correct an- 
cestry; unfortunately^ the twelfth-century scribes 
who copied his record and added their own Elamite 
comments^® knew him only as a son of Lankukuj a 
name otherwise unfamiliar; hence his exact position 
in the line of succession remains doubtful. 

History often shows that the rulers and peoples of 
a weakening kingdom make every effort to recapture 
the glorious days of the past. Deliberate archaization 
is one of the methods used in attempting to restore 
^that past; perhaps, therefore, we may see both weak- 
ness and archaization in the numerous claims to de- 
scent from the great Shilhaha. At any rate, about 
1750 B.c. Elam fades almost entirely from our view. 
Inasmuch as Babylonia about this time falls under 
the shadow of the Kassites, we must turn to these and 
to Babylonia’s history for light. There we shall try 
to discover whether Elam’s fate is not reflected in the 
catastrophe which befell its neighbor on the west, the 
Land of the Two Rivers. 

Scheil, Mem.^ V, 56 f. (No. 78). Other bricks of Shilhak-Inshushinak 
mentioning this ruler: Mem.^ Ill, 58, and V, 90 (No. 40). 

In the spring of 1932 the writer was permitted to examine an unpub- 
lished manuscript of Professor Poebel, *'Zur Geschichte Elams zur Zeit 
der Dynastien von Isin, Larsa und Babylon,’’ which had been completed 
several years earlier, but in which the threefold division of power in Elam, 
somewhat as described in this chapter, was proposed. Inasmuch as the 
writer had already at that time reached the conclusion that some such 
scheme was necessary to bring order out of chaos, he is glad to have been 
anticipated by so great an authority, and consequently places all the more 
faith in the accuracy of the picture as here presented. 



CHAPTER V 


THE KASSITE INTERLUDE 

T T Hx'^S been rightly stated that few conquerors 
left so great an impress of their power upon 
Babylonian peoples as did the Kassites^ though 
we know little of their earlier history/ Fortunately, 
some idea of their linguistic connections may be 
gained from a list of Kassite words compiled by- 
Babylonian scribes, who gave also their correspond- 
ing Akkadian translations/ Most of the preserved 
words, as well as the majority of the personal names, ^ 
demonstrate that the common people among the 
Kassites spoke a Caucasian language which was per- 
haps a near neighbor of Elamite/ Another list, which 
turns the names of Kassite rulers into i\kkadian, 
adds further light on the question of their deities em- 

^ A. T. Olmstead, “Kashshites, Assyrians, and the Balance of Power,” 
AJSL, XXXVI (1919/20), 120. 

2 Friedrich Delitzsch, Die Sprache der Kossder (Leipzig, 1884), pp. 
25 f.; T. G. Pinches, “The Language of the Kassites,” JRAS, 1917, pp. 
102-5. 

3 A. T. Clay, Personal Names Jrom Cuneiform Inscriptions of the Cassite 
Period (“Yale Oriental Series,” Vol. I). Many Kassite names occur in 
the Nuzi documents now awaiting publication. 

^ The studies of Georg Hiising on this subject, though of doubtful 
value, are often stimulating; cf. Memnony IV (1910), 22-30; OZ.Z, 1917, 
cols. 106-9, 178-81, and 205-9; OZZ, 1918, cols. 43'"4^ 264-72. 

89 



90 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


bodied in the names.^ The fact that more than one 
deity has been identified with a given Babylonian god 
points to the syncretism of several groups of gods be- 
fore the invaders entered Babylonia. We are^, how- 
ever^ able to discern that some of the Kassite gods are 
of Caucasian type. Such are Shipak^ equated with 
Marduk; Sah^ identified with Shamash; Hudha/ 
likened to Adad; and Harbe, corresponding to Enlil.'^ 
Others of their gods are of uncertain origin. Among 
these are Kashshu, their eponymous deity^ who 
doubtless took his name from their land and may also 
'be Caucasian; Kamulla or Ea; Dur and Shugab, 
equated with Nergal; Shuqamuna, likened to Nergal 
and Nusku; Hala or Gula; Shumalia or Shibarru, “the 
Lady of the Bright Mountains, who dwells on the 
summits’’; Mirizir or Beltu; and Gidar or Ninurta. 

We may detect among the invaders another ele- 
ment also. The horse was a divine symbol to the Kas- 
sites; and their constant use of this animal, which be- 
came common in Babylonia only after their entry, 
connects the intruders with the Indo-European 
hordes who were at this time attacking the whole 
northern boundary of the Fertile Crescent, namely, 
the Hittites, the rulers of Mitanni, and perhaps an 

s H. W. Rawlinson, Cuneiform Inscriptions of Westerti Asia^ VoL V, 
PL 44, i and iv. 

^ Possibly to be read Hulahha. 

7 Cf. the Elamite deity Hurbi in col. i, 1 . 15, of the Naram-Sin treaty 
text cited above, p. 35, 



THE KASSITE INTERLUDE 


91 


element among the Hyksos. This connection is fur- 
ther substantiated by the names of other Kassite 
deities. Shuriash^ equated with the sun-god Shamash^ 
is indubitably the Hindu Surya® and the Greek He- 
lios. Maruttash^ likened to Ninurta^ has been identi- 
fied with the Indian Marut. Buriash, another storm- 
god like xAdad, appears to be identical with the Greek 
Boreas. 

xAll these factors show that the Kassites were a con- 
glomerate people^ and we live too long after them to 
disentangle completely the various elements of their 
composition. Nevertheless, it seems clear that aa In- 
do-European, and so ultimately Nordic, ruling caste 
had once lived among them and dominated a group of 
alien and largely Caucasian peoples. Normally, such 
conquerors force their language upon the subject peo- 
ples, but we have one example of the reverse in Mi- 
tanni, and the same situation may have developed 
among the peoples who came into history as the Kas- 
sites; their Nordic aristocracy may in time have for- 
gotten its own language save as it was preserved in 
a few proper names. The native races had their re- 
venge. 

Like their ancestry, the site of the Kassites’ home- 
land is doubtful. Later remnants would indicate that 
they descended upon Babylonia from the central 
Zagros, north of Elam. The great-grandson of their 

® Cf. the occurrences of the element Surya (generally written Shu war) 
in the Amarna letters: J. A. Knudtzon, Die El-Amarna-Tafeln C‘Vorder 
asiatische Bibliothek/' Vol. II), Part 2, p. 1568. 



92 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


third king^ claimed suzerainty over the Guti and 
over Padan and Alman, which should be the Holwan 
region. Shalmaneser III of Assyria^ almost a thou- 
sand years after their entry, found in Namri, a terri- 
tory of the Lullubi, a ruler lanzu, whose name is 
merely the Kassite word for '"king.’’^'^ In the hill 
country to the east and northeast of Babylonia the 
name of the Kassites lingered on into classical times 
among the Kissean and Kossean tribes. However, 
it is necessary to point out that this evidence is large- 
ly negative, for there was a land Kashshen to the 
north of Elam already in the twenty-fourth century 
B.C., at a time when it is highly improbable that the 
true Kassites had yet arrived.""^ This implies that they 
took their name from a country long before occupied, 
and one which may have retained its original desig- 
nation long after new and newer peoples became as- 
similated. Perhaps it witnessed the amalgamation of 
the various elements — Indo-European, Caucasian, 
and other — which composed the historical Kassites; 
perhaps that syncretism had already taken place in 
another and more distant land. 

Too often we speak of invasion and attack, or the 
rapid entrance or intrusion of newcomers into a land 
already populated. This seldom happens. New peo- 

9 Agum-kakrime; see reference to his inscription below^ p. 94. 

Cf. Delitzsch, op. cit., pp. 29-38, and see below, p. 1^3. 

See the excellent article by Weissbach on the “Kossaioi” in Pauly- 
Wissowa, Real-Encyclopddie. 

See the Puzur-Inshushinak inscription above, p. 37. 



THE KASSITE INTERLUDE 


93 


pies do appear on the horizon^ and these may make 
one attempt, however feeble, to descend en masse into 
a coveted land. If repulsed, they begin a policy of 
peaceful penetration, during which they are gradually 
assimilated into the old stock, though losing little of 
their virility. Step by step their members advance in 
power, until they themselves, once despised and 
feared, are in control and rule the land. 

Thus occurred the ''conquest” of the Kassites in 
Babylonia. As early as 1 896 b.c. Samsudluna of Baby- 
lon repelled a wholesale invasion of the lowlands by 
their hungry hordes. Thereafter for almost one-hun-* 
dred and fifty years they appear in the Babylonian 
business documents as harvesters, laborers, and hos- 
tlers.^3 The intervening steps in their rise to full pow- 
er are lost, but we must assume that their advance 
was gradual and constant. With minds untutored 
save in borrowed ways, they finally reached the pin- 
nacle of power, and Babylonia fell under the sway of 
the Kassite dynasty in 1749 b.c. 

The first of their kings'^ was Gandash (i749“i734)> 
who ruled sixteen years and in a half-literate inscrip- 
tion called himself ''king of the Four World-Regions, 
king of Sumer and Akkad, king of Babylon.”^^ Ob- 

^3 Cf. A. Ungnad, '‘Die Kassiten/' Beitrdge zur Assyriologie^ VI, 
Heft 5 (1909), 21-26. 

See Weidner, “Die grosse Konigsliste aus Assur,'’ AOF, III (1926), 
66-77. 

^3 T. G. Pinches in Babylonian and Oriental Record^ I (1886/87), 54 
and 78; for other references cf. Olmstead in AJSLy XXXVI (1919/20), 
120. 



94 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


viously, he was attempting to declare himself the le- 
gitimate successor of the dynasty which had just 
ceased. The twenty-two-year reigns of his immediate 
successors, a son Agum and Kashtiliash I, who may 
not have been descended from Agum, point to a stable 
kingdom and to undisturbed power, although the al- 
most total cessation of business documents indicates 
commercial inactivity and possibly stagnation. Ush- 
shi, son of Kashtiliash, ruled eight years; then came 
Abirattash and his son Tazzigurumash. A surprising 
fact is related of a monarch contemporary with the 
-last rulers. This sovereign, Gulkishar of the independ- 
ent Sealands territory (1684-1630), gave land on the 
bank of the Tigris in the region of Der to one of his 
subjects.’'® If Der northeast of Babylonia proper was 
in his control, the Kassites may at this time have 
been cut off from the route to their last homeland in 
the mountains. 

Harba-Shipak and Tiptakzi followed Tazziguru- 
mash, whose line was restored with the accession of a 
son, Agum-kakrime. He it was who proclaimed him- 
self king of Padan and Alman, king of Gutium, in 
addition to the more regular titles king of Kashshu, 
king of Akkad, and king of the broad land of Baby- 
lon.*'^ This may indicate that he felt obligated to pro- 

Enlil-nadin-apli’s kudurru, published by H. V. Hilprecht, Old 
Babylonian Inscriptions (BE, Ser. A, Vol. I), No. 83; cf. P. Jensen in 

vin (1893), 220-24. 

^7 Rawlinson, op. cit.^ Vol. II, PI. 38, No. 2; Vol. V, Pi. 33; cf. Jensen 
in KBy in. Heft i, 134 fF.; for other references see Olmstead, op. cit.y 
p. 121, n. 6. 



THE KASSITE INTERLUDE 95 

tect his ancestral home in the mountains as well as 
the newly occupied regions in the plains. 

Agum-kakrime was followed by Burna-Buriash, 
and he by an unknown and then by Kashtiliash II 
(1530-15 1 2). The latter gradually closed in on the 
Sealands; and his brother marched against Ea-gamil, 
the last king of the Sealands, who took refuge in 
Elam.^^ Then the brother himself, Ulam-Buriash, 
came to the Kassite throne, and with his accession 
(1511) the dynasty seems to have become thoroughly 
acclimated to its new home in Babylonia. The subse- 
quent so-called ''Amarna’' period does not here in-* 
terest us. 

Inscriptions of the Kassite rulers so far mentioned, 
though nowhere numerous, are totally lacking at Su- 
sa, and the excavators at that site appear to have run 
into a barren stratum for the period. Kassite occupa- 
tion of Elam contemporaneous with Kassite sover- 
eignty of Babylonia thus seems out of the question. 
On the other hand, it is certain that the Elamite dy- 
nasty founded by Ebarti and Shilhaha disappeared 
shortly after the First Dynasty of Babylon faded 
from the scene. In the case of Elam, the land may 
have become the prey of peoples who were themselves 
originally fleeing from the Kassite hordes. At any 
rate, for the obscurity which covers both Babylonia 
and Elam at this time the Kassites should doubtless 
be held strictly responsible. 

Cf. L. W. King, Chronicles Concerning Early Babylonian Kings, 
11, 22-24. 



CHAPTER VI 

KINGS OF ANZAN AND SUSA 

W ITH startling suddenness we emerge from 
the obscurity which covers Iran and Elam 
for four hundred years after the advent of 
the Kassites in Babylonia. A highly entertaining tale 
in a later chronicle relates that Hurpatila, king of 
• Elam, besought the Kassite Kurigalzu III (1344-” 
1320 B.c.) to give battle with him at Dur Shulgi, a 
fortress founded east of the Sealands by the great 
king of the Third Ur Dynasty.^ The outcome of the 
battle^ said the Elamite, should decide the fortunes 
of Elam. The forces engaged, Hurpatila was aban- 
doned by his soldiers, and Elam became a portion of 
the empire of Kurigalzu.^ 

Although this particular chronicle is very untrust- 

^ Cf. the Dur Shulgi in Susa documents above, p. 73. 

^ Chronicle P, iii 10 fF., first published in translation by Pinches in 
Records of the Past, new ser., V (1891), 106 ff. Text: Winckler, Altorien- 
talische Forschungen, I (Leipzig, 1893-97), 297 fF. Transliteration only: 
Delitzsch in Ahhandlungen der K. Sdchsischen Gesellschaft der Wtssen- 
schaHen, phil.-hist. Klasse, XXV, No. i (1906), 43 fF. 

The name Hurpatila is generally assumed to be Kassite; cf. G, Hiising, 
F^uellen, p. 19. Note, however, the name of the Elamite god Hurbi in 
the Naram-Sin treaty cited above, as well as such names as Hurbi-^trim 
and Tehip-Z/V/t? in Nuzi texts; cf. E. Chiera, Joint Expedition with the Iraq 
Museum at Nuzi (American Schools of Oriental Research, “Publications 
of the Baghdad School,"’ Texts), Vol. II, No. 212:30, and No. 213:3. 

96 



KINGS OF ANZAN AND SUSA 


97 


worthy, the story is not wholly fiction. Hurpatila, it 
now appears, was the legitimate ruler of Babylon, 
where he ruled at least four years.^ Driven out by 
the Assyrians, he may well have taken refuge in Elam, 
there to continue the battle with the Assyrian nomi- 
nee, Kurigalzu. It is certain, however, that his cause 
w^as utterly lost; in Susa Kurigalzu dedicated an agate 
scaraboid to the god Sataran and a scepter head to 
Enlil;^ on the acropolis he left his own statuette with 
an inscription recording the defeat of Susa and Elam 
and the devastation of Marhashi.^ An agate tablet 
which had once been presented to Inanna in Susa for 
the life of Shulgi of Ur the Kassite brought back to 
Nippur, where he dedicated it anew to Enlil and on 
it recounted once more his conquest of Susa in Elam.^ 

Almost immediately the attention of the Kassites 
was diverted from Elam and centered on the regions 
northeast of Babylonia whence came the supply of 
fresh recruits for their armies. Arik-den-ilu of Assyria 
attacked a little kingdom called Nigimti in the ranges 
east of Arbela and then marched down into the dis- 

3 Cf. E. Unger in Forschimgen und Forlschritte^ X, Nos. 20/21 (July 
10-20, 1934), 256. 

4 Scaraboid: Scheil, Mem., VI, 30; cf. De Mecquenem, MSm,^ VII, 135 ; 
knob or scepter head: Scheil, MSm.^ XIV, 32. 

5 Scheil in RA, XXVI (1929), 7. 

^Hilprecht, Old Babylonian Inscriptions (BE^ Ser. A, Vol. I), Nos. 15 
and 43 and p. 31 . For an inscription of Kurigalzu from Der with a drawing 
of an Egyptian see. Sidney Smith, “An Egyptian in Babylonia,'’ Journal 
of Egyptian Archaeology^ XVIII (1932), 28-32. 



98 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


trict housing the lashubagalla, a tribe later associated 
with remnants of the Kassites in the mountains.’ 
Adad-nirari I also raided the central Zagros, striking 
at the Guti and Lullubi remnants; after his war with 
the Kassite Nazi-Maruttash, the boundary between 
Assyria and Babylonia was established at Arman of 
Akarsallu, which is the Holwan region, extending into 
the mountains as far as the land Lullubium.® 

Under these circumstances Elam quickly slipped 
away from Kassite overlordship; and Pahir-ishshan, 
son of Igi-halki, probably as a contemporary of Nazi- 
Ma4:uttash (1319-1294), founded a new Elamite dy- 
nasty. Unfortunately, his achievements are complete- 
ly unknown to us, save that he transported to an un- 
known site those same precious woods upon which 
Siwepalarhuppak and Bala-ishshan before him had 
so carefully labored.’ Even he left the work to be 
carried on by his brother and successor Attar-kittah 
(ra. 1295-1286), who witnessed the arrival of the ob- 
jects at the Susa temple. In like manner we know 
nothing additional of Attar-kittah; but his son, Hu- 
ban-numena {ca. 1285-1266), seems to have been a 
ruler of tremendous energy. As “king of Anzan and 

7 Clay, Babylonian Records in the Library of J. Pierpont Morgan^ Vol. 
IV, No. 49:6 fF.; cf. Ebeling, Meissner, and Weidner, Die Inschriften der 
alias syrischen Konige, pp. 50 fF.; LARj Vol. I, § 69. 

* Budge and King, Annals of the Kings of Assyria^ I (London, 1902), 
4-6; cf, LAR^ Vol. I, § 73. Cf. Synchronistic History i 28 fF.; I have made 
use of the translation made by the late Professor D. D. Luckenbili for 
the Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute. 

5 Shutruk-Nahhunte inscription; see below, pp. 106 f. 



KINGS OF ANZAN AND SUSA 


99 


Susa” and prince of Elam, he was the first to claim 
the title ‘'expander of the empire”; and bricks bear- 
ing his Elamite inscription, discovered on the island 
Liyan in the Persian Gulf, confirm his claim. The in- 
scription, which invokes the deities Huban, Kiririsha, 
the mother goddess of the island, and the Baha, per- 
haps the local protecting deities, records that Huban 
loved him and heard his petitions and that Inshu- 
shinak granted him the kingdom. As reward, for the 
lives of the women Mishimruh and Rishapanla he is 
erecting a chapel to these gods and uttering the pious 
hope that they give him a prosperous life and a peace- 
ful kingdom.^® His more illustrious successors, Shu- 
truk-Nahhunte, Kutir-Nahhunte, and Shilhak-In- 
shushinak, vied with each other in commemorating 
the name of Huban-numena, who had erected a tem- 
ple to Kiririsha of Liyan and to Huban and Kiririsha.^^ 
Shilhak-Inshushinak, to whom Huban-numena was 

Text: F. W. Konig, Corpus inscriptionum Elamicarmn. 1 . Die alt- 
elamischen Texte (Hannover, 1926), No. 4C. This is a synthesis of (i) 
Pezard, Mem., XV, 42 f., with variants from the Dieulafoy collection in 
the Louvre; (2) Weissbach mZDMG, XLIX (1895), 693 f.; (3) fragments 
now in the Berlin Museum, copied by Bork. 

In Susa only a fragment with the name Humban-ummenna, a variant 
spelling of the name, has been found; cf. Scheii, Mem., Ill, i (No, i). 
On all these cf. Hiising, §uellen. No. 4. 

Shutruk-Nahhunte: Pezard, Mem., XV, 66; Weissbach, “Shutruk- 
Nahhunte in his Anzanische Inschriften (“Abhandlungen der K. 
Sachsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften,” phil.-hist. Klasse, XII 
[1891], 117-50); cf. Hiising, ^uellen. No. 19. 

Kutir-Nahhunte: Pezard, Mem., XV, 73; Weissbach, *‘Kutir-Nah- 
hunte A,’* in Anzanische Inschriften; cf. Hiising, ^ellen. No. 31. 

Shilhak-Inshushinak: {a) temple to Kiririsha: Pezard, Mem., XV, 
76 and 80; Weissbach, “Shilhak-Inshushinak D” and in Anzanische 



lOO 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


even a ''descendant’’ of the great Shilhaha, also 
testified that Susa and Inshushinak were not neg- 
lected/^ 

Untash-Huban (ca, 1265-1245), son of Huban-nu- 
mena, justly acquired a great reputation as a builder. 
During his reign temples, sanctuaries, and other reli- 
gious edifices in abundance were erected on the Susa 
acropolis, each carefully described by an appropriate 
Elamite inscription. Semitic deities thus honored 
were Nabu, who was held in high esteem and received 
both a temple and a statue, Sin, Belala, Belit-ali 
("the Lady of the City”), and Adad; but even Adad 
was paired with Shala, known as early as the period of 
the sukkalmaK% and the great majority of the build- 
ings erected were for Elamite gods. Perhaps less pre- 
tentious were those for Napratep, Shimut, Pinikir, 
Ea-Sunkik ("Ea is king”),''^ Hishmitik and Ruhura- 
tir, Nazit, whose building was under the protection 
of Huban and Inshushinak, and a deity whose name 
is written A.ip(or Ej.A.suNKiK.^'* But Upurkupak’s 
temple, according to the inscription, surpassed all 
others which had ever been erected to this deity; and 


Inschriften; cf. Hiising, ^uellen. Nos. 57 and 59; (J?) temple to Huban 
and Kiririsha; P^zard, Mem,, XV, 86; Weissbach, ''Shilhak-Inshushinak 
5 ,” in Anzanische Inschriften; cf. Hiising, ^uellen, No. 58. 

Scheil, Mem., Ill, 59, and V, 91 (No. 43). 

Written ^nun.sunkik; the translation of nun by£a in this name is 
uncertain, but cf. the deity Ea~'§arru in Akkadian texts. 

Whether this is to be read phonetically is not certain. 



KINGS OF ANZAN AND SUSA 


ICI 


Nahhnnte received his dwelling because he had an- 
swered the prayer of Untash-Huban and performed 
what he requested. Still more magnificent were sure- 
ly those forHuban and Inshushinak. Each separately 
received a new domicile, while jointly as the melki 
ildniy '‘princes of the gods,” they enjoyed a temple, as 
well as a sanctuary known as the nurkiprdty “Light of 
the World-Quarters.” Nor w^as Susa itself forgotten; 
Untash-Huban dedicated a temple and a chapel “for 
my city” to Inshushinak.^^ So numerous were these 

References to Untash-Haban texts: 

a.ip.a.sunkik: Mem.^ Ill, 3 (No. 2); cf. Hiising, ^uellen. No. 5. 

Adad: Mem,^ III, 14 (No. 6j; cf. Hiising, ^uellen. No. 5. • 

Adad and Shala; Mem.^ Ill, ii (No. 5); cf. Hiising, ^uelien^ No. 7. 

Belala: Mem,^ III, 28 (No. 14); cf. Hiising, ^uellen^ No. 10. 

BSlit-^li: Mem.^ HI, 16 (No. 8); cf. Hiising, ^uellen. No. 7. 

Hishmitik and Ruhuratir: Mem.^ Ill, 19 (No. 10) ; cf. Hiising, ^uelien. 
No. 7. 

Huban: Mem.^ Ill, 31 (No. 17); cf. Hiising, ^tielleriy No. 9. 

Huban: Mim.^ Ill, 29 (No. 15); cf. Hiising, ^uellen^ No. 8. 

Huban and Inshushinak {ntir ktprat)\ Mevi,y III, 32 (No. 18); cf. 
Hiising, ^uelleriy No. ii. 

Huban and Inshushinak {melki ilani): Mem.y III, 31 (No. 16); cf. 
Hiising, ^uellen, No. 9. 

Inshushinak (temple): Mem.y III, 38 (No. 21); cf. Hiising, ^uellen^ 
No. 5. 

Inshushinak {giguna): Mern.y III, 34 (No. 19); Weissbach in ZDMG^ 
XLIX (1895), 692 f.; cf. Hiising, ^elleriy No. 13. 

Nabu: Mem.y III, 9 (No. 4); cf. Mem,y III, 15, and Hiising, ^ielleriy 
No. 6. 

Nabu: Mem,y III, 15 (No. 7); cf. Hiising, ^ueUen, No. 7. 

Nabu: Mem., V, 7 (No. 66); cf. Hiising, ^ellen, No. 6. 

Nabu: Mem., Ill, 36 (No. 20); cf. Mem., Ill, 15, and Hiising, ^uelien, 
No. 12. 

Nahhunte: Mem., Ill, 27 (No. 14); cf. Hiising, ^lellen. No. 10. 

Napratep: Mem., Ill, 17 (No. 9); cf. Hiising, ^ellen. No. 7. 

Nazit: Mem., Ill, 21 (No. n); cf. Husing, ^ellen, No. 9. 



T02 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


constructions that they argue for him abundant re- 
sources and extensive conquests; but these were re- 
corded on steles, of which Shutruk-Nahhunte pre- 
served one, while of the rest all save fragments of 
another have since disappeared/^ Untash-Huban 
dedicated to Huban and Inshushinak a limestone 
statue of himself by a bilingual inscription in which, 
it is interesting to note, the Elamite characters al- 
ready show the beginnings of the later forms/^ His 
almost exclusive use of the Elamite language for the 
other records is a sign of nationalistic feeling which 
resulted in increasing opposition to Akkadian culture. 

In his reign Elamite metallurgy attained its climax 
in a life-size bronze statue of Napir-asu, wife of Un- 
tash-Huban, which was cast hollow in a single piece, 


nun.sunkik: Mem.^ Ill, 24 (No. 12); cf. Hiising, ^uellen^ No. 9. 

Pinikir; Mem.^ Ill, 7 (No. 3); cf. Hiising, ^uelleriy No. 5. 

Pinikir (temple); Mim.^ Ill, 9 (No. 4); cf. Mem., Ill, 1 5, and Hiising, 
^uellen. No. 6. 

Shimut; same as B^lit-ali. 

Sin: Mem., Ill, 25 (No. 13); cf. Hiising, ^uellen. No. 10. 

Upurkupak: Mem., Ill, 39, and XI, 88 (No. 23); cf. Hiising, §uellen. 
No. 14. 

**For my city"’ (written al-lum-mi-ma, to be analyzed alu-u^mi-md)\ 
MSm., Ill, 38, and V, 88 (No. 22); cf. Hiising, ^uellen, No. 5. 

“For my city” {giguna)i Mem., Ill, 36, and V, 87 f. (No. 20); cf. 
Hiising, ^ellen. No. 12. 

Shutruk-Nahhunte text: Scheil, Mem., Ill, 43 (No. 25); cf. Hiising, 
^ellen. No. 21. Stele fragments: M. Pezard, “Reconstitution d’une 
st^le d’Unta§-“P gal,” RA, XIII (1916), 119-24; cf. also M. Rostovtzeff, 
“La stele d’UntaS-^^^GAL,” RA, XVII (1^20), 113-16. 

^7 Scheil, Mem., XI, 12 ff. (No. 89); cf. Hiising, ^uellen, No. 1 5. 



KINGS OF ANZAN AND SUSA 


103 


its interior filled with fused metal. The queen wears 
a thin cloth over shoulders and breasts and a long^ 
sweeping ‘Tell skirt” descending to the ground. De- 
tails of the dress ornamentation are carefully repro- 
duced, as are bracelet and ring on her folded hands. 
An Elamite inscription warns him who discovers and 
destroys the statue, or who obliterates or erases the 
name of Napir-asu in the inscription, that the anger 
of Huban, Kiririsha, and Inshushinak will descend 
upon him, that Belti, the great goddess, will deny to 
him fame and family.^^ 

The accession of Kashtiliash III in Babylon (j‘249) 
found Untash-Huban ready to embark upon foreign 
conquest. His pretext for undertaking a war with the 
lowlands may be discovered in the story of Agabtaha, 
a leather-worker who fled from Hanigalbat to Kash- 
tiliash and made for him a leather shield. In pay- 
ment he received an estate near the city Padan on the 
northeast border of Babylonia.''^ The Elamite may 
well have felt that this was territory which belonged 
to Elam, not Babylonia. The ensuing conflict appears 
to have been altogether one-sided; the sole purely 
Akkadian inscription of Untash-Huban commemo- 
rates this, perhaps his greatest achievement. He cap- 
tured Immiria, the protecting god of Kashtiliash, and 
carried him to the Susa acropolis, where Huban, In- 

G. Lampre, MSm.^ VIII, 245 ff., Pis. 15 f.; Scheil, Mim.^ V, i ff. (No. 
65); cf. Hiising, ^ellen^ No. i6. 

Scheilj Mem.^ II, 95. 



104 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


shushinakj and Kiririsha could guard him forever.^® 
The stone bearing the grant of Kashtiliash which 
caused the strife was likewise brought to the capital 
Elam may have suffered from internal troubles in 
the next few years^ for Untash-Huban was followed 
not by a son but by his uncle, Unpatar-Huban, son 
of the dynasty’s founder, Pahir-ishshan.^"^ This may 
explain why Tukulti-Ninurta I of Assyria, without 
resistance from the Elamites, could penetrate the 
Zagros from Tarsina, an inaccessible mountain be- 
tween the cities Sha-sila and Barpanish on the south- 
ern bank of the Lower Zab, into the region of the 
widespreading Guti between the lands of Suqush and 
Lalard^ The Assyrian was again unopposed, after his 
victory over Kashtiliash, when he added to his con- 
quests a long list of border towns which were some- 
times Elamite and sometimes Babylonian.^^ 
Unpatar-Huban ruled only a few years when he 
was succeeded by his brother, Kidin-Hutran {ca, 
1242-1222); the latter retaliated on Tukulti-Ninurta 

Scheil, Mem.^ X, 85. 

So in the Shilhak-Inshushinak lists. Unpatar is consistently read 
Unpahash by Scheil, but cf. Konig in MVAG^ XXX, Heft i (1925), 36, 
n. 54. 

22 Annals: Messerschmidt, Keihchrifttexte aus Assur his tons chen In- 
halts, Heft I (Leip2ig, 1911), No. 16 obv. 17 ff.; cf. LAR, Vol. I, § 149. 

Schroeder, Keilschrijttexte aus Assur historischen Inhalts, Heft 2 
(Leipzig, 1922), No. 60 iii 58 — iv 83; cf. LAR, Vol. I, § 166. The town 
Turnasuma should lie in the region of the Tutnat (in Elamite, Durun), 
while Ulaiash, if it is near the Ulai, must be near the source of the Karkhah 
east of modern Mandali. 



KINGS OF ANZAN AND SUSA 105 

by invading Babylonia. The one and one-half years’ 
reign of Enlil-nadin-shumi, Tukulti-Ninurta’s puppet 
on the throne of Babylon, was brought to a sudden 
close by this unexpected raid of Kidin-Hutran, who 
captured Der, sacked its temple of Anu, and pene- 
trated even to Nippur before returning to Elam. Tu- 
kulti-Ninurta promptly repaired the damage in Baby- 
lon by enthroning Kadashman-Harbe for a year and 
a half, and then Adad-shum-iddina (i'238-~i233). The 
Elamite was not, however, to be denied. Again he 
raided the lowlands; crossing the Tigris he advanced 
as far west as Isin and as far north as Maradda,*just 
west of Nippur, before retreating in safety to his 
homeland.^^ The energy which enabled him to make 
these telling raids is obvious; it is therefore a striking 
commentary on the accidental manner in which our 
Elamite sources have been recovered that the record 
of his exploits is found only in Babylonian literature, 
and that, aside from the lists of Shilhak-Inshushinak, 
the name of Kidin-Hutran does not appear in Elamite 
records. 

Kidin-Hutran was followed by Halludush-Inshu- 
shinak, of whose relation to his predecessors we are 
ignorant and of whose reign we know nothingd^ He 
in turn was succeeded by a son, Shutruk-Nahhunte 
(ca. This sovereign inaugurated the 

Chronicle P, iv 14 fF.; cf. Winckler, op. ciL, I, 124. On the site of 
Maradda cf. Clay in OLZ, XVII (1914), 1 10-12. 

Cf. Hiising, ^uellen, p. 18. 



io6 HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 

really great period of Elamite history, a period we 
might with some justification designate as the “clas- 
sical” period. 

One inscription of Shutruk-Nahhunte, could we 
but translate it accurately, would give us some idea 
of his numerous activities. Unfortunately, the text is 
extremely difficult and in many places the meaning is 
obscure. An introduction describes the transportation 
of a stele from Aia to Susa and its dedication to In- 
shushinak. The record then states that many earlier 
kings had not known the place where certain choice 
woods'"® were to be found, but that he importuned 
Inshushinak, his god, who heard his prayers. The 
route lay by way of Tahirman, Teda, and Kel, then 
by way of HashmaH'^ and Shahnam. Further, many 
former kings had never heard of the places called 
Shali, Mimurashi, and Luppuni. With Inshushinak’s 
aid he discovered the place where the choice woods 
grew; and there he forested, just as did a few kings 
whose names he did not know, and just as did Siwe- 
palarhuppak, Bala-ishshan, Pahir-ishshan, and At- 

The Elamite words here are husa hitek. That the former means some 
sort of timber should long ago have been clear from the Persian texts in 
Mim.y Vol. IX, where it is often preceded by the determinative for wood; 
cf., for example, Mem.^ VoL IX, No. 139:16 and 18; No. 174:4, This 
must also be the correct meaning of the Elamite husame^ e.g., Mem.^ V, 
20 ff. (No. 71), hi 15 £F.: “In Ekallat a temple of Inshushinak with . . . . 
wood had been built.” 

27 The Hashmar pass mentioned in Assyrian records is to be located 
where the Diyala breaks through the Jebel Hamrin; cf. Weidner in AOFy 
IX (1933/1934), 97. 



KINGS OF ANZAN AND SUSA 107 

tar-kittah. Thus with his god’s aid he achieved that 
which many had sought to do and few had accom- 
plished; he, too, brought choice woods to Susa, w'here 
by the grace of Huban and Inshushinak he worked 
them and then in the temple on the acropolis dedi- 
cated them to Inshushinak, his god.^^ With just pride 
he boasted that things w^hich former kings had not 
done he had been enabled to accomplish, and all these 
achievements he had brought about for the glory of 
Huban and Inshushinak.^^ When he discovered a 
stele far up in xAnzan, he was forced to admit that he 
did not know the name of the king who had erected 
it. The inscription which makes this frank confession 
continues with an obscure passage referring to Dur 
Untash, later known as Dur Undasi, on the Hithite 
or Idide River, and to a place Tikni; it concludes with 
a dedication of the stele as the ruler’s offering to his 
beloved god.^° 

Other inscriptions of Shutruk-Nahhunte are more 
easily understood. With baked bricks he beautified 
a chapel of Inshushinak in Susa and uttered the 
prayer that the deity look with favor upon his good 

Weissbach, “Shutruk-Nahhunte C,” in Anzanische Inschriften^ after 
Loftus. Copy, also after Loftus, in Konig, Corpus inscriptiomim Elamu 
carum, Part I, No. fragmentary duplicate: Scheil, Mem.y XI, 15 
(No. 90). Transliteration: Hiising, ^uelkn^ No. 28; attempted transla- 
tion: Scheil, Mem., V, 15 IF. (No. 70). 

Scheil, Mem., Ill, 46 (No. 27); cf. Hiising, ^ellen. No. 17. 

3 “ Scheil, Mem., V, 12 f. (No. 69); cf. Husing, ^uellen. No. 20. On the 
location of Dur-Untash and the Idide River see M. Streck, Assurbanipal, 
n, 48, n. I. 



io8 HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 

deed.^^ When a temple of the goddess Manzat built by- 
former kings fell into ruin, he removed the debris and 
searched diligently for the inscribed bricks which 
those rulers had placed in its walls; with his own new 
bricks he restored the temple to its former glory. 
Stone basins for the cult of the Elamite gods, but es- 
pecially for Inshushinak and Suhsipa, suggest that 
the sacrificial offerings were regularly performed. 
The island Liyan belonged to Shutruk-Nahhunte's 
empire, and there he re-erected and rededicated to 
Kiririsha the temple which Huban-numena had once 
devoted to this goddess. Practically every inscrip- 
tion proclaims opposition to Akkadian culture; Shu- 
truk-Nahhunte’s only text written in Akkadian is a 
dedication to Ishmekarab, an Akkadian deity well 
known in Elam since the days of the sukkalmah" 

Meanwhile Ashur-dan I (1189-1154) had begun his 
long reign in Assyria. Soon he turned upon the weak 
Zamama-shum-iddina of Babylon and wrested from 

3^ Scheil, Mem.^ Ill, 44 (No. 26); Weissbach, “Shutruk-Nahhunte 
5 ,” in Anzanische Inschriften; cf. Hiising, ^uelleriy No. 18. 

33 From brick fragments in the Berlin Museum. These were ascribed 
to Huteludush-Inshushinak by Hiising, ^uellen^ No. 63, but see now F. W. 
Konig, “Die Berliner elamischen Texte VA 3397-3402/' WZKM^ 
XXXII (1925), 212-20; the text appears in Konig, Corpus inscriptionum 
Elamicarum, Part I, No. /i^iA-C. 

33 Scheil, “Legendes de Sutruk Nahhunte sur cuves de pierre,” RA, 
XVI (1919), 195-200. 

34 Weissbach, “Shutruk-Nahhunte Ay' in Anzanische Inschriften; 
Pezard, Mem., XV, 66; cf. Hiising, ^uellen, No. 19. 

3 S Scheil, MSm.y II, 118; Scheil doubts its historicity. 



KINGS OF ANZAN AND SUSA 


109 

him Zaban on the Lower Zab^ Irria^ and Akarsallu.^^ 
Shutruk-Nahhunte at once realized the impotence of 
Babylon, and with his son Kutir-Nahhunte mar- 
shaled Elam’s forces. His own inscription speaks of a 
camp in Eli, of capturing seven hundred cities as far 
as Mara and then a hundred more.^“ He entered Bab- 
ylonia. In Eshnunna he found a statue of a former 
ruler and one of Manishtusu.^^ From Sippar he took 
Naram-Sin’s famous “Stele of Victory”^^ and the great 
stone bearing Hammurabi’s law code; a portion of 
the latter was erased for his own inscription, but the 
blank space was never filled.^® In the vicinity of Kish 
he seized as booty an obelisk of Manishtusu and two 
more statues of the same sovereign, which his in- 
scription declares he found “in Akkad.”^^ He was now 
in the land Karintash, and a stele of Meli-Shipak fell 
into his hands. Advancing to Babylon, he overthrew 
the unfortunate Zamama-shum-iddina, who had 

3^ Synchronistic History iii 9 ff. 

37 Scheil, Mem.y XI, 17 fF. (No. 91); cf. Hiising, ^nellen, No. 28^. 

Mem. ^ VI, 12 f., and X, 2; cf. Hiising, ^uelkn. Nos. 26 f. 

Mem. ^ III, 40 (No. 24), and II, PL XI; cf. Hiising, ^uellen^ No. 22. 

40 Mem.y IV, 1 1 f. 

Kish obelisk: Scheii, Mem.^ II, 6ff.; statues: Mem.y X, if., and 
III, 42; cf. Hiising, ^uelleUy No. 25. 

42 Scheii, Mem.y IV, 163 ff.; cf. Hiising, ^ueUeUy No. 23. Restore 
Karintash with the help of a Shilhak-Inshushinak text, Mem.y V, 31 f. 
(No. 72), ii 10, and the neo-Elamite text of Shutruk-Nahhunte, Mim.y 
V, 62 f. (No. 84), i. II, variant. According to Hiising, ^uelkny p. 53, 
Karintash would be modern Karind on the Baghdad-Kirmanshah road. 



no 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


reigned but a single year (1174), and established his 
own son Kutir-Nahhunte on the throne.'*^ Adding 
further insult, he laid tribute and tax upon the sub- 
jected districts, a stated number of talents and minas 
upon Dur Kurigalzu, Sippar, Dur Sharrukin,'*'' and 
Opis. This tribute was doubtless intended for the 
erection and maintenance of temples to Babylonian 
deities, for there is mention of bricks which should 
restore the walls of their dwellings.'’® Then, loaded 
with monumental spoil, Shutruk-Nahhunte withdrew 
to Susa, where his trophies were dedicated to Inshu- 
shinak with new inscriptions and set up near the In- 
shushinak temple.'’® 

Official Babylonian historians refused the title 
“king of Babylon” to Kutir-Nahhunte and gave it to 
Enlil-nadin-ahhe, who kept up the Kassite resistance 
three more years. Finally, in 1171 b.c., Kutir-Nah- 
hunte put an end to the Kassite Dynasty once and 
for all. Late Babylonian odes then attempted to gloss 
over the unpleasant fact of the Elamite’s rule by in- 
sisting that the gods of Babylon had themselves sum- 

43 So probably we are to restore the text of Nebuchadnezzar I in 

Wmc\iitTyAltorientalischeForschungen,\^^2>S^‘ P* 55- 

44 Restored from Dur-shar- 

4 sHusing, ^uelleny No. 67, drawn from Loftus; a recent copy, also 
after Loftus, in Konig’s Corpus inscriptionum Elamicarumy Part I, No. 
28 C:I. 

46 For other objects brought to Susa at one time or another by members 
of this dynasty cf. Jequier, Mem.y VII, 32 ff. For lists of the kudurriti 
see De Morgan, Mem.y VII, 137 ff.; Scheil, Mem,, X, 87 ff., and XIV, 35; 
for maceheads see Mim.y XIV, 32 f.; for weights, Mem,, VI, 48, and XIV, 
34; for other Kassite texts, Mem,, IV, 166, and VI, 49. 



KINGS OF ANZAN AND SUSA 


III 


moned him to the throne.-*" The Elamite felt alto- 
gether differently^ and Babylon ceased to be the capi- 
tal. Its gods had shown themselves powerless^ and the 
image of Marduk himself was carried off to Susa/® 
where Kutir-Nahhunte now succeeded his father on 
the throne. On his way thither he wrested from her 
temple one other famed Babylonian deity^ Nana, the 
Lady of Uruk. To the actual number of years she re- 
mained captive in Susa Ashurbanipal of Assyria add- 
ed a round thousand when he declared that fifteen 
hundred and thirty-five years before his time Kudur- 
Nanhundi, an Elamite, had not feared the oath o/ the. 
great gods but had laid his hands upon the temples of 
Akkad and carried away Nana to Susa.^^ 

The reign of Kutir-Nahhunte in Elam {ca. iijo- 
II 66) appears to have been short. He had time to 
rebuild the temple of Kiririsha on the island Liyan 
and to dedicate it for his own life, for the life of 
Nahhunte-Utu, his wife, and for the lives of her prog- 
eny.5° He refounded the ruined sanctuary of the deity 
Lagamal in Susa and placed it under the protection 
of Inshushinak.s^ Before his accession to the throne 
he had already surrounded the Inshushinak sanctuary 

47 A. Jeremias, “Die sogenannten Kedorlaomer-Texte,” MVAG^ XXI 
(1916), 69--97, esp. pp. 80 ff. and 92 fF. 

48 Nebuchadnezzar inscription; see above, p. 1 10, n. 43, 

49 See below, p. 206. 

soPezard, Mem,y XV, 73; Weissbach, “Kutir-Nahhunte in An- 
zanische Inschriften; cf. Hiising, ^uellen^ No. 31. 

s^Scheil, Mem,, III, 49, and V, 89 (No. 29); Weissbach, “Kutir- 
Nahhunte B,** in Anzanische Inschriften; cf. Husing, ^ueilen, No. 30. 



112 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


on the northwestern part of the Susa mound with a 
wall of baked brick panels or bas-reliefs portraying a 
man-bull worshiping the date palm;^^ after his acces- 
sion he placed his own statue within this sanctuary, 
which he began to beautify on a large scale.^^ Death 
brought a sudden end to his activities and placed a 
greater conqueror than he on the throne. His decease 
marked the beginning of a new era and the dawn of a 
brief but better day. 

52 Scheilj Mem,^ III, 47 (No. 28); Weissbach, “Kutir-Nahhunte C/’ 
in Anzanische Inschriften; cf. Hiising, ^uellen^ No. 29. On the reliefs 
themselves see J. M. Unvala, “Three Panels from Susa,” RA^ XXV 
(1928^, 179-85. 

5 3 Shilhak-Inshushinak inscription, Mem., Ill, 50, plus V, 89 (No. 30) ; 
complete, Mem.^ Vol. XI, PI. ii, Fig. 2; cf. Hiising, ^uellen^ No. 43, and 
Unvala, loc. cit. 



CHAPTER VII 

THE GLORY OF AN ELAMITE EMPIRE 


S HILHAK 4 NSHUSHINAK (ca. 1165-1151 
B.c^j brother of Kutir-Nahhuntej was without 
question the greatest of the Elamite rulers. His 
reign marks the summit of Elam’s political attain- 
mentSj and perhaps also the height of her commercial 
and economic importance; but the very effort to ex- 
tend his borders was a contributing cause to the col- 
lapse of the empire after his death. Of these things 
we know little; we can only trace his achievements on 
the field of battle and attempt to picture the Susa of 
his time. All else lies hidden in unexcavated and un- 
known mounds of Elam. 

An inscription written late in the reign gives some 
account of his early exploits.^ It begins with a long 
invocation to gods worshiped in Elam: Huban^^ Inshu- 
shinak, Kirifisha, Nannar, Nahhunte, Temti, Sili, 
Shimut^ Hutran, Tiru, the Nap-bahappi-hutip-nap- 
pip^ perhaps deities guarding the dwellings of the 
gods^ as well as the god of the heavens^ the gods of 
Elam^ and the gods of Susa. The king declares him- 
self the son of Shutruk-Nahhunte^ beloved '"descend- 
ant” of the woman Beyak, beloved brother of Kutir- 

^ Scheil, Mem.j XI, 21 ff. (No. 92); cf. Hiising, ^lellen^ No. 54. 



HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Nahhunte, the chosen one of Nahhunte the mighty 
prince- of the Elamite gods. He has inscribed this 
stele for his own life, for the life of Nahhunte-Utu, 
once the wife of Kutir-Nahhunte and now his own 
mate, and for the lives of their children, namely, his 
sons Huteludush-Inshushinak, Shilhina-hamru-La- 
gamar, Kutir-Huban, Temti-turka-tash, and Lili-ir- 
tash and his daughters Ishnikarabbat, Urutuk-El- 
halahu, Utu-e-hihhi-Pinikir, and Bar-Uli. He recites 
his own and his wife’s pious deeds toward Inshushi- 
nak, repeatedly asking the god’s mercy and begging 
that his prayers be heard and his requests granted. 

All this is but introduction; the political historian 
rejoices at what follows. In eight groups, correspond- 
ing perhaps to eight separate campaigns, Shilhak-In- 
shushinak lists the cities which he conquered. Each 
group is preceded by a prayer and followed by the 
name of the district in which the cities were located; 
once the names of over two hundred and fifty such 
places were to be read on this stele. Unfortunately, 
today less than a hundred are clearly legible, and 
only too often the names of the districts have been ob- 
literated. Nevertheless, an analysis of the names is 
well worth the time. The names most clearly recog- 
nizable are those beginning with bit, “house,” or sha, 
“of,” for these indicate their Semitic origin. Others 
bespeak their Kassite, or at least Caucasian, sources, 
while others again are completely unknown. 

^ Meiku^ the Akkadian term! 



THE GLORY OF AN ELAMITE EMPIRE 115 


The first group once contained forty-two place 
names. Today there are legible only Sha ShilitUj per- 
haps Sha Beltia, Bit Buli^ Shenkuru, Bit Nappahe 
("‘house of blacksmiths’’), Sha Imire (""of asses”). Bit 
Nakiru (which may be the Nakri tribe subsequently 
defeated by Tiglathpileser III of Assyria),^ and Bit 
Pilantu. In a second group only Sha Barbari (“of 
wolves”) and Sha .... Nankari (""of .... carpen- 
ters”) can be read. The third group once comprised 
thirty-one cities in the district Ukarsillam Ebeh. 
Since this includes the Akarsallu which had just been 
captured by Ashur-dan and the Ebih Mountain which 
Shamshi-Adad V of Assyria was to cross on his way 
from Zaban (modern Altun Koprii) to the city Me 
Turnat on the Diyala River/ it is not difficult to 
understand where Shilhak-Inshushinak had cam- 
paigned when he gives the names of the conquered 
cities. Here we find Sellam, Tunni, Matku (which 
must be Madga at modern Tuz Khurmatli, from 
which Gudea had once obtained gypsum), Bit Sin- 
iriba. Bit Katashman ("‘house of Kadashman”), Bit 
Lassi, Bit Sin-shemi (known also to Nebuchadnez- 
zar I of Babylon, who granted land of its district on 
the Tigris to his priest of Enlil),^ Bit Etelle, Appi- 

^ a. LAR, Yol I, §764. 

4 LJRy Voi. I, § 723; for the location of the Ebih Mountain see now 
Weidner in JOF^ IX (1933/34), 9b. 

s Text in W. J. Hinke, Selected Babylonian Kudurru Inscriptions (Lei- 
den, 1911), No. 5. A translation made for the Assyrian Dictionary of the 
Oriental Institute was at my disposal. 



ii6 HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 

sini-beti, Sha Warad Egalli (“of the palace servant”), 
and Kiprat. 

The fourth group lay in the district .... tilla and 
comprised eleven cities. The names Arrapha, Nuza, 
and perhaps Titurru (“the bridge”) tell us at once 
that we are in the modern Kirkuk region, even though 
the remaining legible names, Hanbate and Sha Nishe 
(“of peoples”) are unknown. With forty-one sites lo- 
cated in the Durun, Ebeh, Shatrak, and lalman re- 
gions, we are back to the Turnat or Diyala, Ebih, and 
modern Holwan districts. The city names of this fifth 
group which may still be read are Tunnati, Sha Han- 
ta, Bit Rie Rappi (“house of the chief shepherd”). 
Bit Bahe, Sha Puma Mashhum (a Kassite name 
meaning “of the protection of god”), perhaps Bit 
Ishtar, Huratu, Ishirtu sha Adad (“sanctuary of 
Adad”), Sha Anpima, the Great and the Small Bit 
Rituti, Bit Ittatu, Reshu, Bit Rikim Adad (“house of 
the thunder of Adad”), and Bit Mugia.® Bit Ishtar 
later found Tiglathpileser III in its midst, while 
Reshu is probably the Rashi tribe of Arameans, well 
known to the Assyrians from Sargon onward and lo- 
cated in the mountains east of Der, where was its 
capital, Bit Imbi.'^ 

The sixth group once named forty-nine sites in 
the district Balahuta, lalman, and A. . . .zahaya; 
even the names betray the modern Holwan region. 

® Perhaps to be read Bit Ulgia. 

t E.g.. LAR, Vol. I, §§ 773 f., and Vol. II, §§ 34 and 82. 



IHE GLORY OF AN ELAMITE EMPIRE 117 


Here are Nahish Harare^ Sha Hilik, Sha Balihu^ Mu- 
rattash (which Tiglathpileser I found south of the 
Lower Zab in the midst of the mountains Asaniu and 
Atuma)/ Dunnu^ Bit Uzali. . , Bit Hanipi^ Sha Ku- 
pia, three Bitati (''houses”). Bit Nagia, Sha Kattar- 
zah, Duhupuna (which Shamshi-i\dad V was to dis- 
cover south of the Turnat River and Mount lalman)/ 
Annahhutash, Bit Sin-ishmanni, Bit Silia (Assyrian 
Bit Sa^alli or Sha'ali), with its capital Bit sha Ilti 
(known to the ilssyrians as Dur Illatai, where Ara- 
means took refuge^°), Bit Zahmi, Bit Hubbani ("house 
of cisterns”), Sha Marazza, Sha Iklai, Sha Shangibari; 
Tintu Ili-erish, Bit Matimu, Bit Laqipu, Tintu, Bit 
Rikim Adad (already named in the preceding group), 
Bit Tam tea, and Harbatu. The last names of this 
group, proving that we have reached the Kassite 
homeland, are Bit Nap Shumalia ("house of the god 
Shumalia”), Bit Tasak Sunkik (or Bit Tarish Shar- 
ru), Bit Milshipak ("house of Meli-Shipak”), and 
Sha Burra Hutte. The group is closed with Bit Bar- 
bari ("house of wolves”) and "the city Kaplu.” 

The seventh group names Bit Kilalla, Bit Nankari 
("house of the carpenters”). Tan Silam, Bit Kunzu- 
bati, Puhutu, Nakapu, Zallat, Kishu, and Bit Rapi- 
qu; the district name is . . . .kattar. The eighth group 
once named twenty-six sites; of these only Kitan (or 

^ LJR, Yol L§232. 

9 LAR, VoL I5 § 724; restore to Duhupuna with Hiising, ^uelkn^ p. 80. 

LAR^ Voi. I, § 790; cf. also § 806, 



HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


1 18 

Natan), Nar Sillam (“the river of Sillam”), Harap, 
and Bit Kimil Adad are today wholly legible, while 
the name of the district cannot be read. 

So much for this great stele, which continues with 
another dedication formula to the gods of Elam, the 
gods of Anshan, and the gods of Susa. Other stele 
fragments add other names. One cites the district 
Halman Niripuni and formerly named fourteen places 
in a district of which . . . .akmish Lanhu. . . . alone 
can be deciphered. Another names Niripuni Shuru- 
tuha as a district, and in an unknown region places 
the sites Makshia, Sha Kutu, Asse, Sha Kilka. . . . , 
Kishshimu, Harpa. . . . , and Talzana.” 

The campaigns of Shilhak-Inshushinak stand out 
in bold relief after a study of these lists. First Akar- 
sallu and then the Ebih Mountain region between 
modern Altun Koprii and the Diyala River fell into 
his hands. Thence he turned westward and reduced 
a number of Aramean tribes which, even at this early 
date, were settled well up the east bank of the Tigris. 
With the capture of Madga or Tuz Khurmatli he was 
in territory which in ordinary times was indisputably 
Assyrian and from which it was an easy step north- 
ward to Nuzi and Arrapha or Kirkuk. At this point 
he was less than seventy miles due east of Ashur; it is 
therefore not farfetched to assume that Shilhak-In- 
shushinak himself brought to an end the long reign of 

“ Scheii, Mem,, V, 33 (No. 73) and 35 (No. 74); cf. Hiising, ^uellen. 

Nos, 54a and b. 



THE GLORY OF AN ELAMITE EMPIRE 119 


Ashur-dan (1154 b.c.). With Durun and lalman he 
was back at the exit from the mountains of the Tur- 
nat or Diyala River in modern Holwan, from which 
he penetrated eastward into lands which had once 
housed the Kassites. 

The Elamite’s control was far from absolute. Al- 
though his brother had brought to an end the rule of 
Kassite kings in Babylon^ he had been unable to re- 
tain the region, and at Isin in the northern part of the 
alluvium a new power had sprung into being. Under 
Marduk-shapik-zeri this power now began to inter- 
fere in the affairs of Assyria/"^ where, we may suspect,, 
Elamite overlordship was the real cause of revolt and 
unrest following the death of Ashur-dan. Shilhak-In- 
shushinak could ill afford such intervention and at 
once left Elam to chastise the sovereign of Isin. 
Marching to the Tigris, where he defeated an army 
sent against him, he advanced to the city Hussi and 
proceeded up the Euphrates as far as Nimettu-Mar- 
duk, by which he may mean Nimitti-Enlil, the wall of 
Babylon."^ There he may have met defeat, for it is 
clear that henceforth he held little control over any 
part of Babylonia or Assyria. 

The great king still possessed, however, a mighty 

12 Weidner, ‘*Aus den Tagen eines assyrischen Schattenkonigs,” AOF^ 

X (1935). 1-9- 

^3 Text: Weissbach, “Incertum i’* (after Loftus), in Neue Beitrdge 
zur Kunde der susischen Inschriften^ "‘Abhandlungen der K. Sachsischen 
Geselischaft der Wissenschaften/* phil.-hist. Klasse, XIV (1894), 

77; cf. Husing, ^uelkn^ No. 54r. 



120 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


empire. He ruled Liyan in the Persian Gulf, for there 
he restored Huban-numena’s temple to Kiririsha and 
a joint temple to Huban and Kiririsha.’^'' His territory 
reached inland almost to Persepolis, for bricks in- 
scribed with his name and dedicated for his own life, 
for the life of his wife, and for the lives of their prog- 
eny have been found in territory of the Mamassani 
tribe halfway between Ramuz and Shiraz.'® When the 
Balahute, located in the central Zagros, carried away 
vessels of Inshushinak, he brought them back by 
force, making his camp in Eli, Anzan, Ulan, and Sha 
JPurna Mashhum.'® Like Huban-numena and Shu- 
truk-Nahhunte, he employed the title “expander of 
the empire,” and no one had a better claim. 

During his reign Inshushinak, once merely the local 
god of Susa, became the supreme deity of the realm; 
and temples to him arose in all parts of the kingdom. 
A single inscription mentions the erection of temples 
in Tettu, Sha Atta Mitik, Ekallat (whose deities were 
ordinarily Adad and Shala'^), Berraberra, Sha Attata 

Pezardj Mim.y XV, 76, 80, and 86; Weissbach, ‘‘Shilhak-Inshushi- 
nak ysf,” '‘D,” and “ 5 ,” in Anzanische Inschriften; cfrHusing, ^uellen. 
Nos. 57-59. A stele found in Susa was doubtless originally from Liyan; 
cf. Scheil, MSm.^ V, 38 (No. 76); Hiising, ^uellen^ No. 49. 

E. Herzfeld, '*Drei Inschriften aus persischem Gebiet/' MAOG^ 
IV (1928-29), 82-85; I (i9^9“3o)j where there is a translitera- 
tion and translation by F. W. Konig; cf. ZDMG^ LXXX (1926), 244, for 
old Elamite rock-reliefs at Naqsh-i-Rustam near Persepolis. 

Scheil, Mim,y III, 78 ff. (No. 54), iii yff.; cf. F. W. Konig, “Drei 
altelamische Stolen, ” XXX, Heft i (1925), 21. 

Cf. the Bavian inscription of Sennacherib, 11 , 48 if., conveniently 
translated in LAR^ VoL II, §341. This text gives also the location, 
northeast of Babylonia proper in the debatable land. 



THE GLORY OF AN ELAMITE EMPIRE 121 


Ekal Likrub, Marrut (probably the Nar Marrati or 
Sealands)5 and Sha Hantallak.^® But the Lord of Susa 
was not honored to the total exclusion of other 
Elamite gods. Lakamar or Lagamar received a tem- 
ple in Bit Hulmi and Huban one in Beptar Siyan Sit/^ 
while the edifices erected to Kiririsha alone and to 
Huban and Kiririsha on the island Liyan have al- 
ready been noted. From the enumeration of these 
temples we obtain further corroboration of the far- 
extending empire of Shilhak-Inshushinak. He had 
conquered the whole east Tigris country clear to the 
Lower Zab^ while at least a part of the Sealands to the- 
southwest of Susa was also in his possession. Doubt- 
less some of the sites named are to be located within 
Iran at no great distance from the later capital of the 
Achaemenids, Persepolis. 

A tremendous income from all parts of this empire 
now flowed in to Susa^ and with wealth such as no 
Elamite ruler had before possessed he made this me- 
tropolis equal to the other great cities of his time. 
Many as were the industrial and commercial enter- 
prises carried on by private individuals in the busi- 
ness and residential section, that part of the city 
which housed the palaces and temples was the scene 
of even greater activity. Shilhak-Inshushinak brought 
to completion the sanctuary of Inshushinak which his 

^8 Scheil, Mem., V, 20 ff. (No. 71); cf. Konig in MVJG, XXX, Heft i 
(192OJ 29 ff* A temple to Inshushinak in . . . .en-ili is mentioned in the 
text of Scheil, MSm., Ill, 82 ff. (No. 55), rev. 4 ff. 

Scheil, Mem., V, 20 ff. (No. 71), on which see preceding note. 



HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


1 2'2 

brother had begun; at the side of his brother’s statue 
he placed his own image of baked brick and surround- 
ed the temple with bas-reliefs on which was his prayer 
that Inshushinak look with favor on his good deed.'“° 
South of this he restored the sanctuary which Untash- 
Huban had erected to Pinikir^ and the temple for 
Suhsipa, already worshiped by Shutruk-Nahhunte.^*^ 
For the safety of himself and family he constructed a 
sacred inclosure in the sanctuary of Tab-migirshu;^^ 
in the inclosure of Beltia (“my lady”) he incased the 
altar with new ornamentation and surrounded it with 
.copper objects, while that for “Huban the exalted” 
had an alabaster stele.^'* He restored a temple for 
Manzat and Shimut, the latter of whom received par- 
ticular attention as “the Elamite god.”“^ For Inshu- 
shinak and Lagamar he rebuilt another, with the con- 
fession that he did not know the names of the kings 
who had first erected it,“® and still another for Ishni- 

2° Scheil, Mem.^ Ill, 50, and V, 89 (No. 30); complete, Mem.^ Vol. XI, 
PL II; see also Mem.^ Ill, 52 (No. 31); cf. Hiising, ^uellen^ Nos. 43 and 
32, and J. M. Unvala in RAy XXV (1928), 180 f. 

Mem.y Vol. V, No. 71 iv 22 fF.; see reference above, p. 121, n. 18. 
On Pinikir cf. F. W. Konig, “Pinikir,’' AOFy V (1928/29), 101-3. 

^Mem,y Vol. V, No. 71 iii 28 ff.; cf. also the stele inscription which is 
“Incertum 2” in Weissbach, lAeue Beitrage (after Dieulafoy; cf. Hiising, 
^uelleriy No. 52) ; this mentions the deity Suhsipa and the place Karintash. 
A king Karintash (Kara-indash) appears to be named in Mem.y V, 31 
(No. 72); cf. Hiising, ^uellen. No. 51. 

^3 Scheil, Mem.y V, 59 (No. 79); cf. Hiising, ^uelleriy No. 33. 

Scheil, Mem.y III, Saif. (No. 55), upper edge i S. and right edge 

ii I ff. 

Stele; Scheil, Mem,y XI, 60 f. (No. 94); cf, Hiising, ^elkn. No. 53. 

Brick: Scheil, Mem,y V, 61 (No. 82); cf. Hiising, ^uelleriy No. 34. 



THE GLORY OF AN ELAMITE EMPIRE 123 

karabj known in the earlier period as Ishmekarab, 
who also protected a doorway in his own new dwelling 
and in whose honor he named a daughter Ishnikarab- 
bat.^*? 

Doubtless it was to one of these deities that Shil- 
hak-Inshushinak erected the 14-foot-square sanctu- 
ary which was uncovered by excavations in the south- 
ern part of Susa and which housed a superb limestone 
statue of Puzur-Inshushinak. Perhaps the winding 
stairway of 120 steps descending over 85 feet to a 
lower level of the mound led to a temple dedicated to 
another of these godsP^ 

Such constructions as these paled into insignifi- 
cance before two massive temples which arose on the 
southwestern corner of the citadel mound. Architects' 
drawings on fragmentary clay tablets prove that they 
were not erected at haphazard/^ and chance has pre- 
served for us an actual model of this portion of the 
mound. It is a low bronze table surmounted by re- 
productions of these temples, the smaller two-staged, 
the larger three-staged. At sight of them we involun- 
tarily recall the “temple towers of glazed brick with 
horns of shining bronze" which Ashurbanipal de- 
stroyed at Susa some five hundred years later. Two 
standing-stones flank the larger temple, before which 
is the model of a stone platform with cups for the 

Stele; Scheil, Mem., Ill, 82 ff. (No. 55), rev. i ff.; bricks: Mem., 
in, 88, and V, 92 (No. 56); cf. Hiising, ^uellen. No. 37. 

De Mecquenem, “Constructions secondaires,’’ Mem., XII, 72 fF, 

29 Mim., Xn, 77. 



124 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


sacrificial blood. A vase, another platform, and a stele 
are represented, as is also a sacred grove of trees; the 
latter in turn brings to mind AshurbanipaFs descrip- 
tion of '‘sacred groves into which no stranger pene- 
trates, whose borders he never oversteps.*' One of two 
nude shaved and crouching figures holds a vase to be 
used in the sacrifice. At one corner of the table an in- 
cription tells how Shilhak-Inshushinak made this 
bronze object and proclaimed its name “the Rising 
Sun.”^'^ 

The first and smaller temple was erected over the 
site^of Shulgi's temple to Ninhursag and was doubt- 
less dedicated to the same goddess, though possibly 
she now bore a native name, such as Kiririsha or Pini- 
kir. Four foundation deposits marked the temple 
proper, which measured about 50X25 feet, with addi- 
tional rooms on all sides. Four other deposits marked 
the corners of the inner sanctuary, which was slightly 
less than 20 feet square. Statues of Puzur-Inshushi- 
nak and a stele of Manishtusu were to be observed 
within the temple, while the bronze statue of Napir- 
asu, queen of Untash-Huban, adorned the interior of 
the holy of holies. On all sides of the temple extended 
a pavement of baked bricks laid in bitumen, the 
monotony of which was frequently broken by upright 
Elamite steles. 


Gautier, MSm.^ XII, 143-52; Scheil, Mem., XI, 58 (No. 93); cf. 
Hiising, §uellen. No. 56. For the Ashurbanipal references cf. the Rassam 
Cylinder vi 27 ff., conveniently translated in LAR, VoL 11 , § 810. 

3 ^ De Mecquenem, “Temple de Nin-har-sag,” MSm., XII, 70-72. 



THE GLORY OF AN ELAMITE EMPIRE 125 


This temple likewise yielded in magnificence to the 
new edifice for the Lord of Susa, Inshushinak.-^" His 
temple stood on a platform over 130 feet long and 
half as wide, its corners oriented almost due north and 
south. Beneath its foundations of burned brick set in 
bitumen there were again eight foundation deposits, 
four under the corners of the temple proper, w^hich 
measured over 67X33 feet, and four under the angles 
of the inner sanctuary, which was over 26X16 feet in 
size. These deposits consisted of statues of Puzur- 
Inshushinak inscribed with proto-Elamite characters; 
electrum pendants, bracelets, leaves, and rings;* 
bronze basins and rolled bronze leaves; silver and 
stone vases; and tablets of Shulgi, the mightiest king 
of Ur's Third Dynasty. On either side of the temple 
gateway stood a life-sized lion of glazed clay; these 
were the ‘‘colossi, the guardians of the temple," de- 
scribed by Ashurbanipal, who added that fierce wild 
oxen adorned the gates. The latter swung on huge 
inscribed stone sockets, whose inscriptions list the 
former kings who constructed Inshushinak's temple. 
At the doorway decorative clay cones or glazed knobs 
told how Shilhak-Inshushinak dedicated the entrance 

32 De Mecquenem, “Temple de In-§usinak/’ Mem,, XII, 67-69. Cf. 
also Jequier, “Troisieme royaume susien,” Mim,, VII, 36 f.; De Morgan, 
“Trouvaille de la colonne de briques,” Mem,, VII, 49-59; De Mecquenem, 
“OfFrandes de fondation du temple de Chouchinak,*’ Mim., VII, 61-130. 
The latter references must, however, be used with caution, for many oi the 
objects described are demonstrably of neo-Elamite manufacture. 

33 Cf. G. Lampre, Mem., VIII, 164 ff., Figs. 324 

34 Scheil, Mem,, XI, 63 flF. (Nos. 95 and 96); cf. Busing, ^uelkn. Nos. 
48(2 and b. 



126 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


to his god for his own life, for the life of Nahhunte- 
Utu, and for the lives of their children one knob 
was dedicated to Zana-Tentar, who would seem to be 
'The Lady of Babylon/’^^ Also at the doorway in- 
scribed bricks, a few of which were stamped, bore 
Shilhak-Inshushinak’s boast that he restored what 
former kings had built and that he placed each of 
their names on bricks that their deed might be com- 
memorated in his own dayJ^ 

The temple walls, unsupported by buttresses, were 
made of unburned brick veneered with well baked 
brick. Here and there an inscribed brick, sometimes 
glazed, recorded the name of a famous king who had 
erected the temple to Inshushinak. Thanks to the 
royal antiquary, many of the sukkalmaK s were so 
commemorated.^^ Kuk-Nashur and Kuk-Kirwash, 
each of whom by a Sumerian inscription had dedicat- 
ed a temple within the temple area to the god, were 
especially honored; their Sumerian texts were repro- 
duced, and for the edification of his readers Shilhak- 

Scheii, Mem.^ Ill, 72 f., 75 f., and 77 (Nos. 50, 525 and 53) ; photo- 
graph of the latter: Mem., VoL I, PI. 4, opp. p. 104; cf. Hiising, ^uellen. 
No. 44. Other knobs are described by Jequier in Mem., I, 123. 

3 ^Scheil, Mem., Ill, 74 (No. 51); cf. Hiising, ^uellen, No. 44. If 
Teniar is the Akkadian tin.tir, this would indicate that the latter ideo- 
gram was actually so pronounced in Babylonia. 

37 Scheii, Mem., Ill, 66 f., also PI. 10, No. 4 (No. 48) ; V, 61 (No. 83); 
III, 69 f, (No. 49); cf. Hiising, ^uellen. Nos. 35 f. and 40. On the general 
subject of inscribed bricks at Susa cf. De Morgan, Mem., I, 93-95 and 
197 f. 

38 Scheii, Mem., Ill, 53 E, and V, 90 ff, (Nos. 32-45); cf. Hiising, 
^ueUen, No. 39. 



THE GLORY OF AN ELAMITE EMPIRE 127 


Inshushinak confides that he has translated their in- 
scriptions, found their names, and therefore com- 
memorated their deeds. But since an Akkadian text 
of Temti-agun, recording the dedication of a statue 
to Inshushinak for the life of his superior, Kutir-Nah- 
hunte, received practically identical comments,-^® it is 
obvious that Shilhak-Inshushinak could neither read 
nor interpret the Sumerian! Still another type of 
brick set into the walls manifests the ruler’s interest 
in the more immediate present; it names all his chil- 
dren and dedicates the temple as his offering for the 
city of SusaP^ 

Within the building, columns of inscribed triangu- 
lar bricks supported its wooden roof. Beautifully 
glazed bricks, singly and in reliefs, added the neces- 
sary color to the interior walls. But the most curious 
relief is of bronze. It portrays a number of warriors 
marching in single file, all identically clad in helmet 
with pointed visor, sleeveless jacket, short skirt, and 
upturned boots. Their beards are cut square and 
hang on the breasts, and tassels from the helmet cover 
the nape of the neck and ears. A short curved sword 
is held aloft in the right hand, a bow is suspended 
from the left, a mace is thrust through the skirt, while 
a strap over the right shoulder supports a quiver on 
the back. An inscription, today all but illegible, may 

39 Bricks: Scheil, Mlm., V, 56 f. (No. 78), and III, 60 (No. 46); RA, 
XXIX (1932), 68; cf. Husing, ^uellen. No. 38. 

4 " Brick: Scheil in RA, XXIX, 69 f. 

‘I' Scheil, Mem., Ill, 61 f. (No. 47); cf. Husing, ^uellen. No. 41. 



128 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


treat of conquests and the presentation of booty to 
the deities Manzat, Nahhunte, Lagamar, Pinikir, and 
Kiririsha.'*'^ 

The temple altar was guarded by an inscribed 
bronze rod, a hollow cylinder over 14 feet long cast in 
a single piece. The inscription describes its manufac- 
ture and its dedication to Inshushinak for the lives of 
the ruler and his family, but it also contains a lengthy 
curse on those who would damage his handicraft. 
The curse invokes Hutran, the beloved “descendant” 
of Kiririsha and Huban, as well as Huban and 
.Kiririsha themselves, Inshushinak and Nahhunte.'*^ 
Stele inscriptions tell us that Shilhak-Inshushinak 
erected a splendid new altar with ornamentation of 
copper, around which he set copper cult vessels and 
other objects, which may have included replicas of 
horned animals, for its protection. The same inscrip- 
tions add that he placed upon the altar objects which 
we may translate “magnificent likenesses” of Shu- 
truk-Nahhunte, Kutir-Nahhunte, himself, Nahhun- 
te-Utu, Shimut-nika-tash, his brother, and all his 
children; if these were indeed images,' we need no 
longer question the deification of Elamite monarchs 
or of the entire ruling family.'*'' 

A paved court extending on all sides of the temple 

De Morgan, M^m., I, 163 f., PI. 13; Jequier, M/m., I, 123; Scheil, 
M?w., XI, 86, Fig. 18; cf. Hiising, ^ellen. No. 42. 

« Jequier, VII, 37; Scheil, Mem., V, 39 ff. (No. 77) ; cf. Hiising, 
^ueikn. No. 45. 

Scheil, MSm., Ill, 82 ff. (No. 55), obv. 18 £F.; M^m., Ill, 78 ff. (No. 
54), ii I ff.; cf. Konig, MV AG, XXX, Heft i (1925), 19 and 23. 



THE GLORY OF AN ELAMITE EMPIRE 129 


was surrounded by a wall^ doubtless bearing reliefs^ 
and by numerous Elamite steles. Three of these we 
have already studied minutelyj for they outlined Shil- 
hak-Inshushinak’s far-flung conquests. Two others 
described the erection of the temple and its sanctu- 
ary; of these, one was dedicated to Huban, Kiririsha, 
and Inshushinak, the other to Inshushinak alone.*^^ A 
sixth listed the former kings who had erected a tem- 
ple to Inshushinak and enumerated various sites 
throughout the kingdom where other temples to 
Elamite gods might be found. seventh described 
the building of a temple to Manzat and Shimut; an 
eighth has come down to us in fragments only.-^® 
These steles doubtless made an impressive appear- 
ance, but to the worshiping Elamites a sight more as- 
tounding must have been the southern entrance to 
the temple, reserved for trophies from foreign lands. 
Here were on display the great law code of Hammura- 
bi, the splendid obelisk of Manishtusu, the famous 
''Stele of Victory'' of Naram-Sin, and boundary 
stones without number bearing grants of land. These 
were the embodied proofs of the ruler's prowess in 
arms, of his distinction abroad and at home. They 
and the temple inclosure suggested the glory of the 

^3 See above, pp. ii 3 ff. and Ii 8 . 

^^Scheii, Mem., Ill, 78 fF. (No. 54) and 82 fF. (No. 55); cf. Konig, 
op. cU.y pp. 18 fF. and 22 fF. (Nos. 46 f.). 

47 Scheii, MSm.y V, 20 fF. (No. 71); cf. Konig, op. csL, pp. 29 fF. (No. 48). 

48 Scheii, Mem., XI, 60 f. (No. 94), and V, 10 (No. 68); cf. Hiising, 
^ellen. Nos. 53 and 50. 



130 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Elamite empire; but after that empire had decayed, 
they remained but an echo of power gone forever. 

History affords frequent examples of empires which 
reach their prime only to pass into immediate decline, 
and Elam was no exception. A process of disintegra- 
tion began shortly after 1 1 50 b.c., when Shilhak-In- 
shushinak gave place to Huteludush-Inshushinak, 
whom he had named first in the lists of his sons. 
Huteludush-Inshushinak himself many times claims 
descent from both Kutir-Nahhunte and Shilhak- 
Inshushinak, and once from the father of both, Shut- 
ruk-Nahhunte, as well. In reality it would seem that 
he 'was a son of Nahhunte-Utu, who was perhaps a 
daughter of Shutruk-Nahhunte married first to Kutir- 
Nahhunte and then to Shilhak-Inshushinak. With- 
out daring to assume the title borne by his predeces- 
sors, “king of Anzan and Susa,” Huteludush-Inshu- 
shinak persisted in calling himself the “expander of 
the empire,” though without just cause. A tendency 
to archaize is noticeable both in the sign forms and in 
the content of his inscriptions, and this in itself sug- 
gests that the great days of Elam were in the past. 
The fact that no inscription of his has been found on 
the island Liyan in the Persian Gulf may indicate 
that Liyan was now lost to his kingdom, although his 
erection of a temple for Upurkupak in Shalulikki, 
later Shallukea, proves that at least a part of the 
Sealands was yet subservient.'*® 

Brick: Scheil, Mem.y XI, 75 (No. 99); cf. Hiising, ^ellen^ No. 62; 
Harper, ABL^ Nos. 789 and 1311; Waterman, RCAE^ II, 52 and 414 ff. 



THE GLORY OF AN ELAMITE EMPIRE 131 

The constructions of Huteludush-Inshushinak in 
Susa were neither pretentious nor numerous. In Ki- 
pU;j perhaps a part of the temple area, he erected a 
temple to Ishnikarab for his own life, for the lives of 
his legitimate brothers, and for the lives of his sons, 
daughters, and relatives.^® For the goddess Alanzat 
he made a stone door socket for his own life, for the 
life of Nahhunte-LTu, his revered mother, and for the 
lives of his legitimate brothers. This he placed in the 
temple of Manzat and Shimut which had been erected 
by Shilhak-Inshushinak, and again he calls the latter 
deity the “Elamite god.'*^^ With small flat gre.en- 
glazed bricks he constructed a diminutive rectangular 
chapel for Inshushinak and declared that the anger of 
Huteludush-Inshushinak and of the ancient Shilhaha 
should descend upon him who disturbed it.^^ A stele 
which may be attributed to him calls upon the gods of 
Anshan and the gods of Susa as well as Inshushinak, 
Kiririsha, Nahhunte, Upurkupak, Tiru, and Man- 
zat.^^ Although remembered by the neo-Elamite Shu- 
truk-Nahhunte/^ it is clear that Huteludush-Inshu- 

so Brick: Scheil, Mem., XI, 71 (No. 98); cf. Hiising, ^uellen. No. 60; 
F. W. Konig in Festschrift der Nationalbibliothek in Wien (1926), p, 530, 

Scheil, Mem., XI, 69 (No. 97); cf. Hiising, ^uellen, No. 65. 

52 jeqmer, Mem., VII, 38. Texts: Scheil, Mhn., XI, 72!. (No. 99), 
and V, 60 (No. 80); Weissbach, “Incertum 3,’' in Neue Beitrdge; cf. 
Hiising, §uellen. Nos. 61 f. 

5 3 Scheil, Mim., V, 37 (No. 75). There attributed to Shiihak-Inshushi- 
nak; but cf. Hiising, ^uellen, No. 64. 

54 Brick: Scheil, MSm., V, 62 f. (No. 84). 



132 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


shinak was a ruler of little importance and that dur- 
ing his reign the power of Elam rapidly declined. 

The appearance of a great king in Babylonia, Nebu- 
chadnezzar I, coincided with the disintegration of 
the Elamite power. The Babylonian made the most 
of his opportunity. In his own inscription he recounts 
the victories of the Elamite Shutruk-Nahhunte and 
his son over the Babylonians and tells of his resolve 
to avenge these victories or to die in the attempt. 
With the remnant of his people he penetrated the 
country of the Elamites and reached the sources of 
the Uknu or Karkhah River, probably at a point east 
of Mandali, where he awaited their attack. Backed 
by the army of his predecessor on the throne, Hute- 
ludush-Inshushinak was not loath to give battle. The 
warriors of Babylonia, as Nebuchadnezzar himself ad- 
mits, were badly smitten, his cavalry forced to flee in 
disorder. He dared not risk a second engagement but 
retreated to Dur Apil Sin. As he puts it: “The Elam- 
ite followed, and I fled before him; I sat down on the 
bed of weeping and sighing. He then appealed to 
Marduk, who had been held captive "in Elam since 
the days of Kutir-Nahhunte. Marduk heard his la- 
ments and commanded Nebuchadnezzar to bring him 
from hostile Elam.®^ 

ss Rawlinson, Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia^ Vol. Ill, PL 38, 
No. 2; cf. Winckler^ Altorientalische Forschungen, I, 53 c f.; Olmstead in 
AJSL, XXXVI (1919/20), 147 ff, 

CT, Vol. XIII, PL 48; cf. Winckler, op. cit., I, 542 f.; Olmstead, /oc. 



THE GLORY OF AN ELAMITE EMPIRE 133 

Thus far the Babylonian had been totally unsuc- 
cessful; and if Huteludush-Inshushinak had been able 
to hold loyal his Elamite subjects^ he might have 
claimed a complete victory. But Ritti-Marduk, lord 
of the '‘house'' of Karziabkuj a land not far from mod- 
ern Holwan^ transferred his support to the Babyloni- 
an monarch;^' and two priests of the god Ria^ Sha- 
mua and his son Shamaia^ in the city Din Sharri not 
far from Susa, fled from the face of the Elamite king 
and were received by Nebuchadnezzar.^® With such 
unexpected help, Nebuchadnezzar could renew his at- 
tack. Since Der no longer admitted Elamite suzerain- 
ty, it was made the base for a forced march of thirty 
hours into Elam. Heat, dust, and lack of water im- 
peded his progress; but Huteludush-Inshushinak, for 
what reason we know not, oflFered no opposition, and 
Nebuchadnezzar reached the Ulai River not far from 
Susa. There the Elamites finally gathered and, as the 
Babylonian told it, gave such battle that the sun was 
darkened as when dust storms sweep by. Ritti-Mar- 
duk valiantly distinguished himself against his former 
master, and^t the command of Ishtar and Adad 'The 
king of Elam turned back and stood on his moun- 
tain," that is, died. Nebuchadnezzar triumphed; he 

57 Ritti-Marduk kudurru in L. W. King, Babylonian Boundary Stones 
and Memorial Tablets in the British Museum (London, 1912), No. 6, pp. 
29-36; location by Billerbeck, Das Sands chak Suleimania^ pp. 13 f. 

Shamua kudurru in King, op. cit.^ No. 24, pp. 96-98; cf. Olmstead, 
he. cit. Din Sharri occurs in Ashurbanipai^s inscriptions; cf. translation in 
LAR,Yol. II, §806. 



134 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


captured the land of Elam; he plundered its posses- 
sions.5’ Lowland and highland he filled with destruc- 
tion and made like a desert; when at last Nebuchad- 
nezzar returned to Babylonia he was not alone, for 
with him Marduk took the highroad, the path of joy, 
the desired way to Babylon from hostile Elam.^° 
Likewise the god Ria was taken from Din Sharri 
and carried to the alluvium to rejoice the hearts of 
Shamua and Shamaia. In the city Hussi, not long since 
ravaged by Shilhak-Inshushinak, a permanent home 
for the deity was established and was deeded for his 
maintenance. Included in this grant were lands of 
Opis and Dur Sharrukin, once tributary to Shutruk- 
Nahhunte, as well as the region of Hussi of Bit Sin- 
asharidu on the bank of the Takkiru Canal, Bit Bazi 
on the Royal Canal, and Bit Akarnakkandi, which 
was specifically designated as the city of the god Ria.®^ 
Ritti-Marduk also prayed his new lord to grant free- 
dom to his own ancestral lands. He declared that 
under a former king they had been free, but that 
under an enemy rule and contrary to their custom — 
he is obviously referring to the Elamite's — they had 
been brought under the dues of Namar. Nebuchad- 
nezzar promptly released from these dues the lands 

Ritti-Marduk kudurru in King, loc, cit.^ corrected by Thureau- 
Dangin, *‘Un synchronisme entre la Babylone et TElam,” RA^ X (1913), 
97 f. 

Rawiinson, Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia^ Voi. IV, Pi. 20, 
No. I ; cf. Olmstead, op. cit., pp. 148 f. 

Shamua kiidurr'u; see above, n. 58. 



THE GLORY OF AN ELAMITE EMPIRE 135 

of Bit Karziabku, together with their horses, cattle, 
flocks, and woods, and proclaimed the independence 
of the citizens. A curse, which threatens any governor 
of Namar who shall infringe this royal charter, in- 
vokes Ninurta and Adad; Shumalia, “the lady of the 
shining mountains, who dwells on the summits”; 
Nergal and Nana; Shahan, the shining god, son of the 
temple of Der; Sin and the Lady of Akkad; and the 
gods of Bit Habban.®^ 

Nebuchadnezzar also claims that he overthrew the 
mighty Lullubi and despoiled the Kassites.'’^ We 
know nothing of an expedition into Lullubi territory 
save when he attacked Elam, and he may only be re- 
ferring to Lullubi troops in the Elamite army; his 
defeat of the Kassites may in turn refer only to his 
supplanting their dynasty. His claim of conquest over 
Elam was doubtless exaggerated, and his unlimited 
control of the country is denied by the fact that a 
younger brother of Huteludush-Inshushinak named 
Shilhina-hamru-Lagamar succeeded to the Elamite 
throne and was remembered into New Elamite 
times.*'* Nevertheless, it is certain that with the death 
of Huteludush-Inshushinak the dynasty begun by 
Pahir-ishshan withdrew from active participation in 
international affairs. 

Ritti-Marduk kudurru; see above, n. 59. Ibid, 

Brick of Shutruk-Nahhunte: Scheil, Mem.^ V, 62 f. (No. 84). On the 
relationship of this king to his predecessor cf. Koschaker in ZA^ XLI 
(1933). 53 > n- 8 . 



136 HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 

For a time the scene of attempted conquest by- 
westerners shifted to the north of Elam, -where Ashur- 
resh-ishi followed Nebuchadnezzar in claiming a de- 
feat of the Lullubi and all the Guti in their mountain 
regions.®= A few years later Marduk-nadin-ahhe of 
Babylon defeated Tiglathpileser I of Assyria and 
captured, together with its gods Adad and Shala, the 
city Ekallate, which had once been taken by Shilhak- 
Inshushinak.®® Tiglathpileser responded by crossing 
the Lower Zab well up in the mountains and attack- 
ing the lands Murattash and Saradaush/^ Some time 
after his tenth year Tiglathpileser fought another 
skirmish with the Babylonians above the city Zaban 
opposite Arzuhina or modern Altun Koprii; he then 
secured the city Arman and the plain of the city 
Salum and plundered from Akarsallu as far as Lubdu; 
by crossing the Radanu River he made the cities at 
the foot of Mounts Kamulla and Kashtilla a part of 
his kingdom.^* 

Despite these raids there was no material advance 
of any Babylonian power into the eastern mountains, 

'’s Annals: Budge and Annals of the Kings of Assyria, I, 20; cf. 
LAR, Vol. I, § 209. 

“ Bavian inscription of Sennacherib, 11 . 48 S., in Rawlinson, Cuneiform 
Inscriptions of Western Asia, Vol. Ill, PI. 14; cf. LAR, Vol. II, § 341. 

Annals: Budge and King, Annals of the Kings of Assyria, I, 58; 
cf. LAR, Vol. I, § 232; cf. Olmstead, “Tiglath-Pileser I and His Wars,” 
JAOS, XXXVII (1917), 174, and History of Assyria, p. 66. 

“ Synchronistic History ii 14 fF.; annals: Schroeder, Keilschrifttexte aus 
Assur historischen Inhalts, Heft 2, No. 66:10 ff., and No. 69: 15 IF.; cf. 
LAR, Vol. I, §§ 293 and 331 ; cf. Olmstead in fAOS, XXXVII, 183. 



THE GLORY OF AN ELAMITE EMPIRE 137 


while Elam itself seems to have disappeared com- 
pletely as a political entity. Two of the three kings of 
the Second Dynasty of the Sealands^ Simmash-Shi- 
pak and Kashshu-nadin-ahi^ bear names which be- 
speak their Kassite origin, and Mar-biti-apal-usur 
{ca. 996-991 B.C.), who followed the Bazi Dynasty, 
was called a ‘'descendant of Elam”;^'^ but these facts 
tell us absolutely nothing about the land itself. In 
the northwestern part of Susa, where Kutir-Nah- 
hunte and Shilhak-Inshushinak had erected a sanctu- 
ary to Inshushinak, tombs covered the site of the 
earlier buildings; and even the tombs were hopelessly 
poverty-stricken.'^® For a period of over three hun- 
dred years after the death of Huteludush-Inshushi- 
nak our Elamite sources are completely silent. Thus 
it is no exaggeration to say that with his death, so far 
as Elam is concerned, come dark centuries. 

69 L. W. King, Chronicles Concerning Early Babylonian Kings, II, 
51 fF. and 62. 

70 De Mecquenem, “Fouilies de Suse,” RJ, XIX (1922), 13 1 ff. and 



CHAPTER VIII 


INDO-IRANIANS IN THE 
ZAGROS MOUNTAINS 

T hroughout the early historical periods 
thus far described, the inhabitants of the Za- 
gros Mountains seem to have belonged to 
that group of people which has been called, for want 
of a better name, the Caucasian. To this group we 
haVe ascribed the Elamites, the Kassites, the peoples 
of Gutium, and other autonomous populations of the 
highlands. A remote connection of their language 
with the Tamil dialects in India has further suggested 
that the entire plateau of Iran was inhabited by mem- 
bers of this group. 

The coming of the Kassites into Babylonia, with 
their inclusion in the historical perspective, in itself 
argues, however, for the entry of another race of 
people, the Indo-Iranians, into the land. Although 
the Kassites were not themselves of this race, they 
appear to have experienced some contact with Indo- 
Iranian peoples, whence came several non-Caucasian 
deities into their pantheon. The region in which this 
contact took place must have been Iran, and the man- 
ner of its accomplishment is not difficult to imagine. 
Across the steppes of Turkestan from the plains 
138 



INDO-IRANIANS 


139 


north of the Caucasus and the Caspian Sea, Indo- 
Iranian chieftains and their horse-borne warriors 
swept into Iran about the beginning of the second 
millennium B.c. Once within the plateau, their forces 
divided. One branch descended southeastward into 
India, there to impose its language upon the subju- 
gated peoples and to develop it into what is known as 
Sanskrit. The other, a smaller branch, advanced into 
western Iran. From it the Kassites learned of the 
sun-god, Surya, the pest-god, Marut, and the storm- 
god, Burya, and discovered that the horse, the war- 
rior’s animal par excellence, also far excelled the sjow 
ox and ass as a draft animal. 

The western wing of the Indo-Iranian invaders did 
not, however, pause at the Zagros ranges. Its leaders 
drove on westward to the great bend of the Eu- 
phrates, where, in Mitanni, they settled down after 
their long trek to enjoy the doubtful blessings of 
aristocratic rule. Their names are basically Indo-Ira- 
nian, not far removed from those of their one-time 
compatriots, the future Hindus; their gods bore Indo- 
Iranian namek — Indra, Vanina, Mitra, and the Na- 
satya; their warriors were known by a word familiar 
in Sanskrit as marya, “heroes”; and their documents 
dealing with the typically Indo-Iranian pursuit of 
horse-training reveal early Indo-Iranian, almost San- 
skrit, numerals. 

This outpouring of Indo-Iranian dynasts was not 
without its contemporary parallel in the western 



140 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Orient. We can only conjecture the origin of the Hyk- 
sos who subdued Egypt in the eighteenth century 
B.C., but few today can doubt that among them were 
Aryans speaking a dialect of the centum group of 
Indo-European. Contemporaneously, a stratum of 
the same branch of Aryans swept over the Caucasian 
basic stock of Anatolia; its final achievement was the 
centralization of power in the city now known as 
Boghazkby, the capital of a great Hittite empire. 
The origin of these peoples should probably be looked 
for in the west rather than in the east. 

The Hyksos lost control of Egypt about 1580 b.c., 
but the Indo-European Hittite kings remained in 
power to the thirteenth century, when the “Sea 
Peoples” brought ruin to their kingdom and threat- 
ened the safety of Egypt. The Indo-Iranian dynasts 
of Mitanni fell prey a century earlier to their distant 
cousins in Anatolia and to a revived Assyrian empire. 
Their small aristocracies had succumbed earlier s till 
to the Caucasian substratum as had their fellows 
among the Kassites; their written language was Cau- 
casian, and when they were conquered scarcely a ves- 
tige of Indo-Iranian culture remained behind. Their 
penetration into the bend of the Euphrates is, how- 
ever, of great historical importance. It would appear 
that they were but an advance guard of the great 
mass of the same stock which entered Iran; while they 
were reaching the northwestern frontier of Mesopo- 
tamia as early as 1500 b.c., their relatives in the east- 
ern branch were descending into India. One may well 



INDO-IRANIANS 


141 

suppose that the intervening highlands of Iran were 
occupied during the subsequent centuries by the peo- 
ples who a half millennium later enter the stage of 
history as Iranian Medes and Persians. The Cauca- 
sian peoples retained their autonomy only in the Za- 
gros regions, a fact which accounts for the absence of 
Indo-Iranian names in the historical records of Assy- 
rian kings who penetrated these mountains down to 
the ninth century b.c. 

We have already become familiar with the names 
of some of these independent districts, but others are 
entirely new. On the northern border of Elam, quies- 
cent by 900 B.C., was the land of the Ellipi. This in- 
cluded the mountain valleys to the northeast of Der, 
extending perhaps to modern Nihavend and reaching 
as far north as the Baghdad-Kirmanshah-Hamadan 
trail. Slightly north of this were remnants of the Guti 
and the Kassites; and, as in earlier periods, the people 
known as the Lullubi still occupied the fertile Shehri- 
zor plain and guarded the northern approaches to the 
chief commercial road leading to and from the pla- 
teau. Sometimes there is mention of a land Namri, 
long since associated with Bit Hamban and hence 
with the exit of the Diyala River from the mountains; 
but Namri is more often merely an indefinite Assyrian 
expression for the southeastern lands, while the com- 
mon designation for the ancient territories of the 
Lullubi was Zamua, or Mazamua when it became an 
Assyrian province. North of this region again, but 
still south and southeast of Lake Urmia, was the land 



142 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


of the Mannai, while west of the lake extended the 
land Parsua or Parsuash, the first stopping-place of 
the Persians on their way to Parsumash and then to 
Parsa. 

These territories — Ellipi, Zamua (including Namri 
and the land of the Lullubi), Mannai, and Parsuash — 
were the foremost obstacles to Assyrian extension of 
power in the Zagros throughout the subsequent years. 
They were likewise the scene of the first contact be- 
tween Assyrians and Iranians. 

The Assyrian Adad-nirari II (911-890) claims to 
have^ marched from beyond the Lower Zab River by 
the borders of Lullubium and Zamua as far as the 
passes of Namri/ but it was not until the revival of 
power under Ashurnasirpal (885-860) that any real 
advance into the Zagros was attempted. In his reign 
Assyrian warriors attained the Awroman mountain 
range east of the Shehrizor. After three campaigns 
the region was partially subdued, and a provincial 
capital, Dur Ashur, was erected on the site of an 
older city, Atlila, to serve as the grain center of the 
rich area.* One of the opponents encountered bore 

^ i\nnais: KeiUchrijttexte aus Assur historischen Inhalts ^ Heft 2, 
No. 84 obv. 23 E; cf. LAR, VoL I, § 360. 

® Annals: Budge and King, Annals of the Kings of Assyria^ I, 254 fF.; 
cf. LAR^ VoL I, §§ 448-58. On the topography cf. Biilerbeck, Das Sand- 
schak Sukimania^ pp. 21-38; A. T. Olmstead, “The Calculated Fright- 
fulness of Ashur nasir apal,” JAOSy XXXVIII (1918), 209 ff.; E. A. 
Speiser, “Southern Kurdistan in the Annals of Ashurnasirpal and Today/’ 
Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research (1926/27), 1-41. 



INDO-IRANIANS 


H3 


the Semitic name Nur-Adad; the rest — Musasina, 
Kirtiara^ Ameka, Arashtua, Sabini, and Ata — all 
have names we can safely assign to the Caucasian 
group of languages. We are therefore forced to con- 
clude that, if once there had been an Indo-Iranian in- 
termixture with the natives in this part of the Zagros, 
none of its traces remained by 900 b.c. 

The pressure of the Indo-Iranians, or, as we may 
now truly call them, the Iranians of the plateau, soon 
made itself felt in the mountains. As they advanced 
westward into the Zagros they took over from the 
native chieftains the control of the walled cities and 
proved themselves no less formidable opponents to* 
Assyrian warriors than had been their predecessors. 
This we first witness in the reign of Shalmaneser III. 
In 856 this sovereign found in Zamua two Caucasian 
chieft, Nikdime and Nikdiara.^ In 844 a ruler lanzu, 
whose name is but the ancient Kassite word for 
'‘king,’' was recognized as an Assyrian vassal in 
Namri.^ His revolt in 835 was the signal for further 
Assyrian conquest in the east. Namri and Parsua 
were entered^ the land of the Madai or Medes was 

3 For references to the texts and for source criticism see A. T. Oim- 
stead, Assyrian Historiography (“University of Missouri Studies, Social 
Science Series,’’ Voi. Ill, No. i [May, 1916]), pp. 21-28; for convenient 
translations see for the first campaign LAR^ VoL I, §§ 561, 609, and 644. 
On the topography of the reign cf. Billerbeck, Das Sandschak Sukimania, 
pp. 42-66; Olmstead, “Shalmaneser III and the Establishment of the 
Assyrian Power,” JAOS, XLI (1921), 345-82. 

4 Cf. LAR, Vol. I, §§ 573 and 637. 



144 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


encountered near modern Sakiz, some hundred and 
thirty miles east of Arbela; and south of the Zeribor 
Lake, in Harhar, hereafter the Assyrian border for- 
tress, the royal image was installed for worship.^ 
/Vgain in 829 the generalissimo of the Assyrian army 
advanced against Ualki of the Mannean land; be- 
tween this and Parsua, west of Lake Urmia, he en- 
countered Artasari, whose name, compounded with a 
very common Iranian element, shows how the new 
race was pouring into the region.® In the next year 
Parsua and Namri were re-entered.’’ We may be 
certain that Zamua all this time was securely under 
Assyrian domination, for in 830 b.c. the high office 
of eponym was held by the governor of Mazamua, 
Hubaia.* 

When revolt within Assyria ended the reign of Shal- 
maneser,'’ the eastern regions once more became au- 
tonomous. Not so Parsua west of Lake Urmia, which 
was entered by a new power in the Armenian high- 
lands, Haldia, whose king left a stele in the Keleshln 
Pass southwest of the lake." This state of affairs was 
intolerable from the Assyrian standpoint. Forces of 

s Cf. LAK, Vol. I, § 581; for the location of Harhar see Billerbecfc, 

Das Sands chak Suleimania, p. 63. 

6 Cf. LAR, Vol I, § 587. 7 Cf. LAR, Vol. I, § 588. 

® 01 mstead, 'The Assyrian Chronicle,'' JAOS^ XXXIV (1915), 361; 
cf. JAOS^ XLI (1921), 374, n. 61. 

9 Cf. Olmstead, History of Assyria^ pp. 153 f. 

^»Sayce in JRAS, 1894, pp. 691-705; C. F. Lehmann-Haupt, Corpus 
inscriptionum Chaldicarum^ Textband, i. Lfg. (Berlin und Leipzig, 
1928), pp. 24-34; 2. Lfg. (Berlin und Leipzig, 1935), pp. 132-60. 



INDO-IRANIAXS 


145 


the new ruler^ Shamshi-Adad V (825-812)3'' ad- 
vanced into Mannai and Parsua as well as into Alesu 
and Gizilbundu^ lands which may be located in the 
valley of the Jaghati River flowing into Lake L^mia. 
Here was met an Iranian, Piri-shate; if it is true, as 
the annals state, that this individual was king of the 
region, we are witnessing the transference of power 
from Caucasian to Iranian overlords. This conclu- 
sion is corroborated by the names Irtisati, Satirai, 
xArtasiraru, and possibly Mamanish, belonging to 
kings of the land Nairi on the xArmenian border. How- 
ever, when xAssyrian forces advanced southward ftom 
Parsua into the land of the Madai or Medes, possibly 
in the region of the snow-capped Takht-i-Balkis, they 
encountered a chieftain Hanasiruka whose name 
sounds peculiarly Caucasian. Iranian domination of 
the northern Zagros had not, therefore, been achieved 
by 822 B.C., and the movement of Iranians from the 
plateau cannot yet have been completed. 

In his fourth year Shamshi-Adad initiated a cam- 
paign against Babylonia by traversing Ebih, the 
southern part of the mountain range known as the 
Jebel Hamrin, and capturing the cities of Me Turnat 
and Di^bina in regions long since known to Shilhak- 
Inshushinak of Elam. In his fifth year the Assyrian 

Annals: KB, I (Berlin, 1889), 174-87; Weidner, '*Die Feldzuge 
SamSi-Adads V. gegen Babylonien/’ JOF, IX (1933/34), 89“i04; cf. 
LJR, VoL I, §§718-22. On the topography and Iranian names cf. 
Billerbeck, Das Sands chak Suleimania, pp. 66-69; G. Hiising, *‘Vorge- 
schichte und Wandeningen der Parsawa/’ Mitteilungen der Anthropologic 
schen Geselischaft in Wien, LX (1930)? - 5 ^ 



146 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


crossed the Lower Zab River, the Ebih Mountain, 
and the Turnat or Diyala, pressed through Mount 
Hashmar, and descended upon Der (modern Badrah), 
which was robbed of its treasures. The inhabitants 
of Der, we are told, forsook their city for Elam; from 
Parsamash, soon to be familiar as Parsumash and to 
house the Iranian Achaemenes, as far as Bit Bunakki 
on the headwaters of the Karkhah, there was plun- 
dering, devastation, and conflagration.'^ 

Toward the last of Shamshi-Adad’s reign, Namri 
joined forces with his enemies, and the succeeding 
sixty-five years witnessed a temporary decline of As- 
syria. Eight expeditions, nevertheless, were directed 
against the Madai or Medes, two against the Mannai, 
and four against Namri. These amounted to little, 
for the star of Haldia was again in the ascendancy. 
King Menuash occupied Parsua, then left his inscrip- 
tion on the Tash Tepe south of Lake Urmia in Man- 
nean land.'^ The Assyrian Adad-nirari III (812-782) 
is merely repeating an old formula, therefore, when 
he claims conquest of Ellipi, Harhar, Araziash, Mesu, 
Madai, Gizilbundu, Munna or Mannai, Parsua, and 
other lands."* His successors were even more impo- 
tent than he. 

We enter upon the last period of Assyrian history 

“ 0 . Schroeder, Keilschrifttexte aus Assur historischen Inhalts ^ Heft 2, 
No. 142; cf. Weidner in AOF, IX, 101-4. 

C. F. Lehmann-Haupt, Corpus inscriptionum Chaldicarum^ Text- 
band, i. Lfg., pp. 45-47. 

KB, I, 190 f.; cf. LAR, Vol. I, § 739. For the whole period cf. 01 m- 

Stead, History of Assyria pp. 158-61. 



INDO-IRANIANS 


with the accession of Tiglathpileser III (746-728). 
As we examine his records we notice that his op- 
ponents in the east bear names which show inextrica- 
ble mingling of Kassite or Caucasian, Aramean, and 
Iranian races; the increasing predominance of the lat- 
ter is of great importance, for it forbodes the estab- 
lishment of Iranian empire. 

One line of Assyrian advance’* in the second year 
of the reign brought about the return of the fertile 
Shehrizor to the status of a province whose governor 
could, in later years, assist in the deportation of little 
groups of Zagros inhabitants to faraway Syria.^ In 
this region were engaged the forces of Tuni of Sumur- 
zu, Miki of Halpi, and the land of Bit Hamban. 

A second line of attack was pursued in the moun- 
tains somewhat more distant, but we find it difficult 
to locate exactly the “lands” and cities mentioned. 
Most of their names are of Caucasian origin, as are 
nearly all place-names in this region down to the 
latest period. The names of the individuals encoun- 
tered are often more suggestive. Some of these were 
Kaki, king of Bit Zatti; Tunaku in Bit Abdadani; 
Mitaki; Battanu in Bit Kapsi; Bisi-hadir of the city 
Kishisa (later familiar as Kishesim) ; and Ramateia of 
Araziash, who furnished products typical of moun- 
tain ranges and fertile valleys — horses, cattle, sheep. 

Annals: I have been permitted the use of Professor Oimstead's 
unpublished reconstruction of the annals of Tiglathpileser III. For 
the published annals see P. Rost, Die Keilsckrifttexte Tiglat-Piksers III 
(Leipzig, 1893), pp. 6 ff.; cf. LJR, VoL I, §§ 766-68 and 773 f. On the 
topography cf. Billerbeck, Das Sandschak Suhimania^ pp. 72—94. 



148 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


and lapis lazuli. Careful study of the topography of 
this expedition makes it probable that Assyrian forces 
advanced to the region around Bane and Bistan, 
roughly about one hundred and twenty-five miles 
east of Arbela over difficult terrain. From Bit Abda- 
dani, for many years an Assyrian dependency, the 
Semitic Mannu-kima-sabe was required to furnish 
three hundred talents of lapis lazuli (almost ten tons, 
if we are to believe the record !) and five hundred tal- 
ents of copper. 

The year 737 found a still greater campaign under 
way. Upash of Bit Kapsi, whose territory was again 
entered, fled to Mount Abirus, possibly a peak of the 
Penja-Ali-Dagh northwest of modern Hamadan. 
Other chieftains, Bur-Dada, Ushuru, and Tanus, like- 
wise found safety only in flight. lautarshi, whose 
Iranian name bespeaks his origin, betook himself to 
the vicinity of the Rua range, which extended, so we 
are told, into the salt desert and so is perhaps the 
Penja-Ali-Dagh itself. Encouraged by these suc- 
cesses, the eponym canon could well declare that the 
campaign was actually directed against the land 
Mada, the land of the Medes, for it was in this very 
region that Iranian Medes coalesced into a kingdom. 

Inscriptions intended for display likewise picture 
the advance, though less accurately than the annals. 
In these we discover the land Parsua, the city Zakruti 
of the mighty Medes, and the land Nishai; and here 
we read the claim of tribute from the lands of the 



IND04RAXIAXS 


149 


Medes and the Ellipi and from the chieftains of ail 
their mountains as far as Mount Bikni. The mention 
of Parsua is curiously out of place unless we can see 
behind the name groups of peoples from Parsua trav- 
eling from the shores of Lake Lrmia southeastward 
toward Hamadan. The city Zakruti is still puzzling, 
although some have equated it with the Sagartioi 
tribe of the Persians, mentioned by Herodotus/^ 
Xdshai, however, is too familiar from the famous XI- 
saean breed of horses for its mention here to be only 
accidental. The Ellipi we have long known, while 
Mount Bikni years ago was identified with the De-. 
mavendd^ and the comparison of ‘‘Bikni, the moun- 
tain of lapis lazuli/’ with the famous blue stone so de- 
sired throughout antiquity is sufficient to prove its 
identity with the bluish snow-clad peak towering over 
the modern capital of Iran, Teheran/^ There is no 
need to declare Tiglathpileser’s claim an overstate- 
ment, though that is, of course, possible. It is rather 
an understatement, for “tribute” may just as well 
have included commercial purchases and voluntary 
gifts as complilsory payments."^ 

When Sargon (722-705) inherited the throne of As- 

iii. 93; cf. the references in Prasek, Gesckkhte^ I, 85, n. i. 

^7 Winckler, Die KeihchriftUxte Sargons, I (Leipzig, 1889), xxvii, n. 3. 

Cf. Olmsteadj History of Assyria ^ p. 362, 

^^Herzfeld, AMf VII (1934), 24-26, follows the doubtful lead of 
Prasek, Geschichte^ I, 18-20, in distinguishing between ‘'Medes*’ or 
"mighty Medes” and "Medes on the border of Mount Bikni.” 



HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


150 

Syria he was faced with the immediate problem of 
preserving and expanding the provincial organization 
in the Zagros and of combating the influence of the 
Haldian empire to the north and east. Danger first 
threatened in the kingdom of the Mannai south of 
Lake Urmia, where an Iranian chief, Mitatti of the 
land Zikirtu, had persuaded the natives to revolt from 
their lord Iranzu. The latter appealed to Sargon, who 
drove the rebels out in 719;^" but three years later the 
new sovereign Aza was slain by Mitatti and another 
Iranian, Bagdatti. Sargon restored the line of Aza 
.with a brother, Ullusunu,'*' but the pressure of Haldia 
proved too strong and he too defected. Another expe- 
dition from Assyria quickly brought him to his senses, 
expanded the province Parsuash by the addition of 
six districts, and made Harhar, temporarily known as 
Kar Sharrukin, once more the capital of a province, 
which also included six new districts. If, as seems 
likely, we are to locate this city in the southeastern 
reaches of the Shehrizor, we are not surprised to find 
that the kingdom of Ellipi with its sovereign Talta is 
mentioned in this connection, and that" twenty-eight 
Median village lords here paid their respects to the 
Assyrian commander. 

Again in 715 Haldian forces entered Mannean land. 

=» Annals: A. G. Lie, The Inscriptions of Sargon If Part I (Paris, 
1929), corrected by Olmstead, “The Text of Sargon Annals,” JJSL, 
XLVII (1930/31), 259-80. For the year 719 see Lie, op. cit.. pp. 8 if.: 

§ 6 . 

Lie, op. cit.^ pp. 12 ff.; cf. LAR^ Voi. II, §§ 10 f. 



INDO-IRANIANS 


15 1 

With a native governor^ Daiaukku^ whose son was a 
Haldian hostage, they conspired to overthrow Ullu- 
sunu and seized twenty~tw^o fortresses in the land. 
This time likewise Sargon acted quickly Daiaukku, 
whose name was rendered in Greek as Deioces, to- 
gether with his family was captured and deported to 
Hamath in Syria, and peace was brought to the dis- 
rupted land. A revolt in the lower Shehrizor w'as also 
subdued in this year, two new regions added to the 
province, and Kar Sharrukin strengthened to prevent 
a recurrence of the event. The matter-of-fact account 
in the Assyrian annals is unexpectedly enlivened by a. 
letter which relates the actual events of the strength- 
ening of this city and describes a foray into the land 
of the Medes; it must therefore be seen as the real 
source of the annals themselves, which declare that 
twenty-two city prefects of the Medes again delivered 
their gifts in this capital. Details of other engage- 
ments also may be discovered in the reliefs which 
once adorned the palace of Sargon. There we see the 
capture of the city Kishesim in the province of Par- 
suash, a triple-walled fortress equipped with mag- 
nificent flanking towers; Sikris in the Kar Sharrukin 
province, a simple high-walled inclosure also provided 
with flanking turrets; Kindau, to whose chief gate a 
causeway leads over a swamp; and other cities sur- 

Annals: Lie, op. clt.y pp. 16 ff.; cf, LAR^ Vol. II, §§ 12-15. 

Harper, ABL^ No. 126; cf. Waterman, RCAE^ I, 86 f. In this letter 
it is stated that the Medes are <iuiet. 



152 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


rounded by moats or protected by lofty walls and 
battlements.'^'' 

These reliefs also depict for us the inhabitants of 
the Zagros at this period, native and Iranian alike. 
The hair is cut short, usually curled, and held in place 
by a red fillet, though often low caps with broad fore- 
head bands are worn; the short beard also is curled. 
Over a short-sleeved girdled tunic reaching to the 
knee is worn a curious sheepskin coat which on peace- 
ful occasions hangs over both shoulders, open in front, 
but in battle serves for protection, replacing the As- 
-syri^n leather collar and mail breeches. Like their 
opponents, some of these Zagros chieftains go bare- 
foot; but a conspicuous part of the costume consists 
of high laced boots, a few of which have the upturned 
point we have often considered Hittite, but which are 
indispensable in mountainous regions. For weapons 
they carry neither bow nor sword; the regular weapon 
of offense is a long spear, of defense, a rectangular 
wicker shield."’ 

An elaborate report of Sargon’s expedition of 714"® 
tells us more of these individuals. Crossing Mount 


^^Harhar: Botta and Flandin, Monument de Ninivcy Voi. I (Paris, 
1849), 55 ^ Kishesim: ibid,. Pis. 68 and 68 bis; Sikris: ibid.y PL 64; 

Kindau: ibid., PI. 61; Bit Bagaia: ibid,y PL 76; Kisheshlu: ibid.y VoL II, 
PI. 147. Cf. Billerbeck, op, cit., pp. 98-101 nn. 

25 Cf. Billerbeck, Das Sandschak Suleimania, pp. 163-67; Olmstead, 
History of As Syria ^ p. 244. 

2® Thureau-Dangin, line relation de la huitieme campagne de Sargon 
(Paris, 1912); other fragments in Schroeder, Keilschrifttexte aus Assur 
Mstorischen Inhalts y Heft 2, No. 141. Cf. LARy VoL II, §§ 140 ff. 



INDO-IRAXIAXS 


Kullar in the valley of the Lower Zab north of the 
Shehrizor^ Sargon and his warriors soon reached Man- 
nean land^ where they were greeted by Ulliisunii. In 
Parsuash the governors of X^amri, of the land of the 
XledeSj and of many other lands hastened to present 
their gifts — ‘'prancing horses^ swift mules, [Bactrian] 
camels/' To the casual reader the names of these 
chieftains are uninspiring, but the specialist examines 
with care the elements which indicate Iranian origin. 
Here came Talta of Eliipi, a member of the old racial 
stock, but with him three Iranian chieftains from the 
bottom lands south and east of the Shehrizor: Uksa-* 
tar, the first Cyaxares; Durisi; and Satareshu. N^or 
were they alone. Other chieftains from the Zagros 
and the Iranian plateau joined in presenting their 
gifts to the great power of the Orient, xAssyria. Their 
names are preserved for us in two lists, one of which 
is at times a mere epitome of the second but often 
adds still other names.'” At this late date we are 
amazed at the large number of Caucasian rulers, such 
as Paiaukku^and Mashdaiaukku, whose names, like 
that of Daiaukku or Deioces, contain elements occur- 
ring abundantly in the texts from Nuzi. Yet the num- 
ber of individuals whose names we may with little 
hesitation call Iranian is not small. xAuarparnu em- 

=7 One list is in the account of Sargon’s eighth campaign, II. 42 - 49 ; 
cf. LJR, VoL II, § 147. The other is in Prism A, il. i4-37> published by 
Winckier, Die Keilschriptexte Sargons, II, PI. 44 ; I have been able to use 
a revised copy of the prism text, prepared by Luckenbill tor the Assyrian 
Dictionary; for translation cf. LAR, Vol. IT, § 192.. Cf. the good notes on 
Iranian names in Konig, Alteste Gesckichte, pp. 55“S^* 



154 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


bodies the element aura, “lord,” which in Achaeme- 
nian times is found in the name of the great god of all 
beings, the “Wise Lord,” Auramazda. Bagbararna, 
like the land name Bit Bagaia, which may have been 
translated into Semitic to become Bait Hi (“house of 
the god”), contains the element baga, already familiar 
from the Iranian words of Kassite times. Satarpanu, 
like Satareshu, contains the Assyrian transcription of 
the word khshathra, known from Old Persian as 
“kingdom.” Ashpabarra, compounded of the word 
for “horse” and the verb “to bear,” evidently means 
'“the cavalryman.” Doubtless the inability of the As- 
syrian scribe to reproduce on his clay tablet the 
wealth of Iranian sounds as he heard them in other 
names, such as Ushrai, Hardukku, and Arbaku,“® 
hides from us still other Iranian elements in proper 
names. No member of that expedition, however, can 
have failed to recognize the distinctions between Cau- 
casian and Iranian in feature, dress, and language; we 
may even conjecture that when the Madai, inhabit- 
ants of Media, henceforth are mentioned in Assyrian 
annals the scribe meant peoples of the Iranian group. 

Sargon’s ninth year witnessed a brief excursion into 
Ellipi and Media in the east.“’ A Median province on 

Obviously the source whence came the name Arbaces in the 
Ctesias list; see below, p. 176, n. 15. 

Lie, op, cit.y pp. 28 fF.; cf. LAR, Vol. 11 , §§ 23 f. The fact that Bit 
Daiaukkij formerly seen as one of the objectives of this year, was a mis- 
reading (cf. Lie, loc. cit., and see Thureau-Dangin in RAy XXIV [1927], 
75, n. 3) has been totally ignored by later authors. 



INDOJRANIANS 


'55 


the frontier of Ellipi, Bait Hi, together with other dis- 
tricts within the mountains, was subdued as far as 
the land of the Manda. Tribute is claimed from forty- 
five city lords of the jMedes and from Talta of Ellipi. 
The Assyrian forces may indeed have advanced be- 
yond modern Hamadan, for cylinder inscriptions de- 
clare that they conquered from Hashmar as far as 
Simash on the border of the distant eastern Medes,^’*' 
and Simash like Ellipi was on the Elamite frontier. 

3 oWinckler, Die Keilschrifttexie Sargons, 11 , PL 43, 1 , 14; ct. LAR^ 
VoL IIj § 1 18; the phrase hitherto read as adi { 7 ndtu)simaspdtti {main'ima- 
dai .... must be interpreted thus: adi {tnatu^smas patti [matt I'm adai 
. . . . , ‘'as far as the land of Simash on the border of the land ■of the’ 
Medes ” 



CHAPTER IX 

A NEW ELAMITE KINGDOM 


ALTHOUGH Elam disappeared as a great 
/\ power in the twelfth century b.c., it is incon- 
jL ^ ceivable that government in this land as well 
as in all southwestern Iran can have disintegrated 
completely. Some day perhaps we shall discover the 
names of local chieftains who maintained a semblance 
•of power in their own districts and who appeared 
great to their subjects. The future may disclose to us 
rulers whose sovereignty centered around modern 
Shiraz and who extended their domain to the south- 
east, thus being unknown to our sources. We may 
even learn that when Elam again appeared as a 
political power it was as the result of pressure of new 
immigrants, possibly kinsmen of those very Iranians 
who were so hardily pressing into the northern Za- 
gros, or mayhap x'lrameans entering the plateau from 
southern Babylonia. At present we are hopelessly at 
sea; the very name of the land is unmentioned in con- 
nected sources from about 1150 to 821 b.c. We know 
nothing of its internal condition even at the latter 
date, when Shamshi-Adad V declares that it partici- 
pated against him in a battle at Daban.^ 

^Annals: KB^ I, 174 fF.; cf. LAR^ Vol. I, §726, and discussion in 
Olxnstead, History of Assyria^ pp. 1 56 L 

156 



A NEW ELAMITE KIXGDO.M 


Escape from this uncertainty comes only in 742 
B.c. At this time, a Babylonian chronicle informs us, 
Huban-nugash, son of Huban-tahrah, became king of 
Elam.^ Not too literally may we accept this dictum. 
It now appears that throughout the first part of the 
subsequent period there was no single kingdom of 
Elam, only a kingdom of Anzan and Susa. The sov- 
ereign of this empire, like the rulers of the twentieth 
and nineteenth centuries b.c., could attain to supreme 
power only step by step. Beginning perhaps as king 
of Susa, an individual could, through family prestige 
or political intrigue, eventually reach the highest 
office. In Babylonia the ruler of the comparatively 
subordinate city Susa was known as the king of Elam. 
This title was therefore a complete misnomer which 
for years puzzled historians of the lowland. 

Huban-nugash was the first ruler of Susa of whom 
we have record; our Babylonian sources, when dealing 
with Elamite affairs of this time, speak only of him. 
His sister was wife to Huban-immena, in whom we 
must see the first king of this new x\nzan and Susa 
empire. Neither ruler is mentioned in the contem- 
porary records of Tiglathpileser III, who, besides 
overcoming the mountain clans north and east of 

® Babylonian Chronicle B, i 9 1 ^-; I have been able to use the translation 
made for the Assyrian Dictionary by the late Professor D. D. Luckenbill 
from the text last published in CT^ Vol. XXXIV, Pis. 43 Ir. 

The name is given as '‘Ummanigash, son of Umbadara,” in Ashurbani- 
pal’s Cylinder A, vi 52, in Streck, Assurhanipal^ pp, 54^*5 LAR^ 
Vol. 11, §810. 



HISTORY OF Ex^RLY IRAN 


158 

Ashur, was likewise engaged in reducing the Aramean 
tribes along the east bank of the Tigris.^ When the 
Assyrian Sargon became more ambitious, Huban-nu- 
gash of Susa tried his own hand at conquest/ En- 
deavoring to assist Merodach-Baladan, Sargon’s ene- 
my in Babylonia, the Elamite won a skirmish near 
Der, although he failed to capture the city (720 b.c.). 
His own death three years later brought to a tempo- 
rary halt Elamite attacks on the lowland. 

Successor to Huban-nugash in Susa was his 
nephew, Shutruk-Nahhunte II (717-699);^ the real 
claim to future power of this individual lay in the 
fact that he was son of the great king of Anzan and 
Susa, Huban-immena. How long he remained in the 
Susa office we do not know; his own inscription ad- 
vises us that when he had attained to the kingship of 
the realm of Anzan and Susa through the aid of his 
deity Inshushinak, he erected for this god a chapel.® 

3 Rost, Die Keilschrijttexte Tiglat-Pilesers ///, pp. 4 fF.; cf. LAR, Vol. I, 
§764; see Olmstead, History of Assyria, pp. 176 f. Nakri and Pahhaz, 
attacked at this time, had already been mentioned by Shilhak-Inshushi- 
nak; see above, p. 115. 

^ Lie, The Inscriptions of Sargon II, Part I, pp. 6 f., restored with 
Olmstead, AJSL, XLVII (1930/31), 262 f., but compared with Baby- 
lonian Chronicle B, i 33 ff. On the event cf. Olmstead, Western Asia in the 
Days of Sargon of Assyria (New York, 1908), pp. 44 f., and History of 
Assyria, p. 251. 

s Babylonian Chronicle B, i 39 f.; in the Susa temple Ashurbanipal 
found a statue of Ishtar-Nanhundi, who is, of course, our king. 

® Scheii, Mim., V, 62 f. (No. 84) ; it is this inscription which gives to 
Shilhina-hamru-Lagamar and Huban-immena the title of king (see 
above, p. 135). Other texts of this ruler: Scheii, Mem,, III, 90, and V, 
93 (No. 57); V, 67 f. (No. 85). 



A NEW ELA^IITE KINGDOM 


159 


This the modern archeologist has discovered in a 
building over twenty-five feet square on the south- 
eastern part of the Susa acropolis." 

To the reign of Shutruk-Nahhunte II must also be 
attributed several other inscriptions from Elamite 
territory. One, written on a stele found at Susa and 
long since ascribed to the anointing priest Shutriiru, 
relates the erection of more than thirty statues in as 
many cities of the kingdom.^ Others are found on 
rock reliefs far to the east of Susa near the plain now 
called Malamir south of the river Karun. Long before 
Shutruk-Nahhunte this plain had possessed anjm-- 
portant Elamite settlement; early business docu- 
ments, as well as numerous tells and ruin heaps, be- 
speak its onetime commercial prosperity.^ Script, lan- 
guage, and representations prove that the reliefs and 
inscriptions of Hanni, son of Tahhihi, prince of 
Aiapir, also belong to the period of the neo-Elamite 
kingdom.^*’ 

One of these reliefs portrays the bearded Hanni 
with head swathed in a cloth similar to that worn in 
the same region today. A plaited tress of hair hanging 
to his waist is actually a pigtail; a robe descending to 
his knees is decorated with a band of rosettes and 
then with long tassels; a skirt extends to his feet. Be- 

7 De Morgan, Mim,y VIII, 34 f. 

® Scheii, Mim,^ V, 69 fF. (No. 86). See above, pp. 72 ff. 

^0 Konig, Geschicke Elams ^ p. 34, equates “son of Tahhihi’* with hen 
Tahhai^ meaning a man of the nomad Tahha tribe; however, Flarper, 
ABL^ No. 282 (Waterman, RCAE^ I, 194 f.), shows that the Aramean 
Tahha tribe did not dwell in Elam. 



i6o HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 

hind him stands his priest, Shutruru, while a warrior 
with his bow and musicians with their instruments 
show that his court was maintained in the best orien- 
tal style. The inscription, dedicated to the deities 
Tepti, Tirutir, Tirutur,” Napirshipak, Man(?), Hu- 
ban, and Nahhunte, speaks of achievements of the 
king Shutur-Nahhunte, son of Indada, and of build- 
ings or steles erected in xAiapir and Shilhite. This 
king may not be our Shutruk-Nahhunte, but his name 
suggests that he was a member of the same family 
and dynasty/^ 

TJie relief in another ravine represents Hanni, his 
wife, perhaps their children, and a second man who is 
probably the king. The latter wears a helmet pro- 
jecting in front and covering the nape of the neck be- 
hind; his beard is long and straight. A robe reaching 
to his knees is belted tightly at the waist, while his 
feet are bared^ 

The deeds of Shutruk-Nahhunte were not limited 

should we read Tirushak? See T. J. Meek, Old Akkadian^ Su- 
merian^ and Cappadocian Texts from Nuzi (‘‘Harvard Semitic Series,” 
VoL X [Cambridge, Mass., 1935]), p. xiii; cf., however* the Elamite deity 
Tiru in Mim.y V, 37 (No. 75), 1. 15, and in Mem., XI, 21 fF. (No, 92), 
obv. i 9, where I do not believe that we should read Ti-shup (i.e., 
Teshup). 

Relief: Jequier, Mem., Ill, 133 fF. Text: Scheii, Mem., VoL III, 
PL 23 and pp. 102 fF. (No. 63) ; also published by Weissbach in his Neue 
Beitrdge zur Kunde der susischen Inschriften, “Abhandiungen der K. 
Sachsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften,” phil.-hist. Klasse, XIV 
(1894), 742 fF. Other reliefs in this ravine show processions of men and 
animals; cf. Jequier, Mem., VoL III, Pis. 27-29. 

Jequier, Mim., VoL III, Pis. 26 and 32^. Text: Scheii, Mem., Ill, 
108 jff. (No. 64). 



A NEW ELAMITE KINGDOM 


163 


to architectural monuments or self-extolling inscrip- 
tions. Like hi's predecessor he^ too, supported Mero- 
dach-Baladan in Babylon, a policy that appeared 
none too wise when Sargon captured Dur Athara, 
scarcely sixty miles from Susa, and made it the capi- 
tal of a new province.^*^ Consequently the Elamite 
proceeded to the hill country east of Der; his subse- 
quent loss of a few border fortresses east of the Tigris 
in the vicinity of Der was more than compensated by 
the repulse of an Assyrian attack on Bit Imbi in the 
land Rashi eastward in the mountains.^^ Campaign- 
ing in this region was, even for Sargon, too difficult,, 
and success came only when his cohorts w^ere able to 
advance over well-kept trails. Such a road — the one 
leading from Baghdad to Hamadan — favored his 
troops in 708 b.c., when the well subsidized ruler of 
Ellipi, Talta, departed this life. In the fratricidal war 
which followed, one son, Nibe, sought the aid of Shu- 
truk-Nahhunte, who provided forty-five hundred 
bowmen; the other, a son by an Iranian wife, if w^e 
may trust his name, Ishpabara, appealed more suc- 
cessfully to Assyria, which established him on the 
throne.""^ 

Lie, op. cit.^ pp. 42 fF. On the location of the city cf. Streck in 
MV AG, XI, Heft 3 (1906), 18 f., where the name is read Dur-Abi}},ara; 
Olmstead, Western Asia in the Days of Sargon of Assyria, p. 130, n. 4. 

Lie, op. dt., pp. 50 ff. A location of Bit Imbi in the Dasht-i-Gawr 
with BiHerbeck, Das Sandschak Suleimania, pp. 123 f., seems too far 
north to meet the geographical requirements. 

Lie, op. dt.y pp. 72-75. Cf. Olmstead, History of Assyria, p. 249; 
Harper, ABL, Nos. 159-61 and 174 (Waterman, RCAE, I, 1 08-11 and 
116-19); and LARy II, § 65. 



1 6a HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 

Shutruk-Nahhunte was far from oppressed by these 
setbacks, although his next move likewise resulted in 
failure. He brought Merodach-Baladan back from an 
enforced retreat in the swamplands, added to his 
forces a large number of Elamite bowmen and cavalry 
under the leadership of Imbappa, Tannanu, and ten 
division commanders, and obtained for the Baby- 
lonian a brief reign. Unfortunately, a number of the 
Elamite troops were put to rout when Sennacherib 
attacked Kutha in 70a, while the main body, de- 
serted by its allies when the Assyrians stormed Kish, 
was severely crippled and lost its baggage.'^ 

Following up his success, Sennacherib advanced 
along the Kirmanshah road against the lasubigallai 
and the remnants of the Kassites, who, he declares, 
had not been submissive to the kings his fathers.^® 
He could not have progressed deeply into the moun- 
tains, however, for shortly afterward Ellipi became 
restless. The governor in Harhar declared that mat- 
ters were quiet enough in his own immediate region, 
but that Ishpabara on the south was definitely on the 
warpath. Further, he reported, Uaksatar or Cyaxares 
in the bottom lands of the Shehrizor, who had offered 
gifts to Assyria in Sargon’s eighth year, was heading 
a conspiracy against the prefect of a city within the 

^'^Text in Sidney Smithy The First Campaign of Sennacherib (London, 
1921), 11 . 5-27; see now Luckenbili, Annals of Sennacherib (OIP, Voi. II), 
pp. 48 ff., and cf. LAR^ VoL II, §§ 257-59. 

Beilino Cylinder, 11 . 20-26; see now Luckenbili, Annals of Sen- 
nacherib^ pp. 58 f., and cf. LARy Vol. II, §§ 277 f. 



A NEW ELAiMITE KIXGDOM 


Harhar province/'^ In righteous anger against the un- 
faithful Eilipij Sennacherib raided their royal resi- 
dences Marubishti and Akkiiddu and annexed a part 
of the land to Harhar. The fate of Uaksatar remains 
unknown^ although tribute from the Medes is claimed 
as a result of this expedition and he may have recog- 
nized Assyrian suzerainty 

In a monarchy^ defeat in battle is often the signal 
for revolution at home, Shutruk-Nahhuiite’s throne 
may already have been insecure as a result of his re- 
verses abroad. When, in 700, his ally Merodach- 
Baladan was forced to flee Babylon for the Elamite 
city Nagitu on the Persian Gulf, his overthrow was 
certain. Our Babylonian sources tell us that the new 
‘'king of Elam’' was Haliushu, whom we know as 
Hallushu-Inshushinak (699-693), brother of the first 
sovereign of Susa, Huban-nugash, and son of Hiiban- 
tahrah."^^ 

This sovereign bided his time five years. Then, 
when the Assyrian troops w^ere searching for Mero- 
dach-Baladan at the mouth of the Ulai River among 
the Elamite districts of Nagitu, Hilmu, Pillatu, and 

Harper^ ABL^ No. 645; Waterman, RCAE^ I, 448 f. 

»®Bel!i!io Cylinder, 11 . ^7-33; cf. Luckenbill, Annals of Sennacherib^ 
pp. 59 f., and LAR, VoL II, §§ 279-82. 

See his inscription published by Scheil, Mem.^ Ill, 100 f., and V, 
93 f. (No. 62). Cf. also Babylonian Chronicle B, ii 32-34. The name 
cannot be read Hailutush; the last sign is usually but once it is su 
(Streck, Assurbanlpal^ pp. 214 fF., iii 6), while Ashurbanipai, who dis- 
covered his statue in the Sosa temple, writes his name Eallusi (CyL A, 
vi 54; cf. Streck, op, cU.y pp. 54 f.; LAR^ Vol. II, § 810). 



1 64 HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 

Hupapanu (694 b.c.)^ he determined on a bold course. 
Moving straight against Sippar in the central part 
of the lowland, he massacred its inhabitants and sent 
Sennacherib’s own son, Babylon’s sovereign, to Elam 
for a sure execution. On the throne he placed Nergal- 
ushezib, wEo added to the conquests the territory 
from Nippur to Uruk — practically all of Babylonia. 

These were impressive achievements; and Hallu- 
shu-Inshushinak could well claim to be the empire’s 
expander, as he does when, as the beloved servant of 
Huban and Inshushinak, he constructs for the Lord 
of Susa a sacred room lined inside and out with glazed 
brick .^5 Unfortunately, his conquests could not be 
sustained. In retaliation for the loss of his son, Sen- 
nacherib put to death the son of the Elamite, and his 
army in the south took Uruk from Nergal-ushezib. 
The Elamites withdrew, and Nergal-ushezib followed 
suit, but in a renewed attack was himself captured by 
the Assyrians at Nippur, Hallushu-Inshushinak had 
not, however, returned to his homeland soon enough. 
His disappointed subjects revolted and dethroned 
him late in 693 b.c.®^ 

Kudur-Nahhunte (693-692) is called the new king 
of Elam in the Babylonian sources; his actual rela- 
tionship to the kingdom of Anzan and Susa as to his 

22 Babylonian Chronicle B, ii 35-46. 

=3 Cf. Jequier, Mem.^ I, 128; for the text see n. 21. 

=“4 Babylonian Chronicle B, ii 47 — iii 9. Annals: for convenience see 
Lnckenbill, Annals of Sennacherib^ pp. 38 £, 73 ff., and 89 cf. LAR^ 
Voi. II, §§ 246 f., 318-21, and 354. Cf. Oimstead, History of Assyria, 
pp. 290-92, 



A NEW ELAMITE KINGDOM 


predecessors is completely unknown. It is likely that 
his capital was neither Anzan nor Susa but Madaktu, 
a city in the upper Karkhah River valley. 

Sennacherib at once realized the opportunity of- 
fered by the change in Elamite rulers. If with Xine- 
vite troops he struck from the north into Rashi 
and the Elamite possessions east of Der^ their army 
would be prevented from re-entering the plains of 
Babylonia; Mushezib-Marduk, whom the Elamites 
had substituted for the decapitated Xergal-ushezib, 
would be left without an ally; and the beleaguered 
Assyrian troops in the south could return to Assyria 
in all safety. The plan was wisely conceived and bold- 
ly executed. Rashi was ravaged, Bit Imbi captured, 
and the passes which led to Bit Bunakki and Tell 
Humbi on the headwaters of the Karkhah w^ere car- 
ried. jMadaktu was endangered, and Kudur-Nah- 
hunte withdrew deep into the mountains to Hidalu, 
probably to be located on the modern Karun River.^^ 
The Elamite need not thus have retreated, since the 

*5 A location of Madaktu at the ruins near Derre-i-Shahr in the Saimar- 
reh plain on the Karkhah River fits the geographical requirements better 
than does Oppert's location on the Ab-i-Diz north of Dizfui, or Biller- 
beck's at Kalat-i-Raza just northwest of Susa. For the latter views see 
Billerbeck, Susa (Leipzig, 1893), pp. 70-72; Streck, Assiirbaiiipal, p. 44, 
n. 2. 

For location cf. Streck, op. ciLy p. 324, n. 3; Billerbeck, Susa^ p. 72. 
The city is named in the Achaemenian documents from Susa in Mem.y 
VoL IX, Nos. 65 and 238. Billerbeck’s location at Diz-Ivlalkan on the 
middle Karun is on the direct road between Dizfui and Isfahan, only 
seventy miles in a straight line from Susa and forty miles from Malamir. 
This site would be a natural retreat for Elamite kings fleeing Madaktu 
OF Susa. 



i66 HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 

January torrents made it impossible for xAssyrian 
troops to reach Madaktu and Sennacherib was com- 
pelled to order a retreat. His tactics had nevertheless 
proved highly successful. The Assyrians in southern 
Babylonia returned home safely^ and a palace revolu- 
tion cost Kudur-Nahhunte his throne and life after 
but ten months of rule.^' 

No trifler was his brother and successor^ a second 
Huban-immena (692-688), known to Assyrians as 
Umman-menanu. To the support of Mushezib-Mar- 
duk in Babylon he mustered a mighty army. It com- 
prised forces of Anzan, of which he must have been 
sovereign; of Parsu(m)ash, not the Assyrian province 
west of Lake Urmia but the district known to Sham- 
shi-Adad V as Parsamash and probably already in the 
hands of the Persian Achaemenes; of Ellipi, now 
largely beyond Assyrian influence; and of a score of 
Aramean tribes east of the Tigris or bordering on the 
Persian Gulf. Against this formidable army Sennach- 
erib dared offer resistance only when it had advanced 
to Halule on the Tigris in northern Babylonia. The 
Assyrian annals recite a magnificent paean of victory; 
the sober Babylonian chronicle indicates that the 
affair ended in a drawn battle.^^ 

Again calamity fell upon the Elamites, for in April 
of 689 the leading spirit of the confederacy, Huban- 

27 Babylonian Chronicle B, iii 9-15. Annals: for convenience see 
Luckenbill, Annals of Sennacherib ^ pp. 39 ff., 88 f., and 90 f.; cf. LAR^ 
VoL II, §§ 248-51, 351, and 355. 

Luckenbili, Annals of Sennacherib^ pp. 41 ff.; cf. LARy Vol. 11 , 
§§ 252-54; Babylonian Chronicle B, iii 16-18. 



A NEW ELAMITE KINGDOM 167 

immena;> suffered a stroke of paralysis. Deprived of 
his aid, Babylonian offense degenerated to a weak 
defense, and in November Sennacherib recaptured 
Babylon. By the following March Huban-iminena 
was deady^ and with him died also the Elamite hopes 
of additional conquest in Babylonia. Our sources for 
the eight-year reign of his successor, Huban-haltash'^*" 
I (688“68i), are completely silent. 

According to Babylonian sources, a second Huban- 
haltash (681--675) ascended the throne 'hn Elam” 
upon the death of the first. In the eyes of Esarhaddon 
the new sovereign was pro-Assyrian, for he put to^ 
death a fugitive son of Merodach-Baladan. There- 
upon the refugee's brother, Naid-Marduk, found it 
expedient to desert Elam and become an Assyrian 
ally; in reward he was intrusted with the administra- 
tion of the Sealands.^" 

According to Elamite or at least Susian sources, 
however, the successor to Huban-haltash I was Shil- 
hak-Inshushinak II, son of Ummanunu, that is, a son 
of that Huban-immena who had halted Sennacherib 
at Halule. Iii Susa this ruler erected a temple to Dil- 
bat, the ‘lady of the city,” on the bronze door sockets 
of wKich he wrote his Elamite inscription.*'^^ It is cer- 

29 Babylonian Chronicle B, iii 19-27. 

In Akkadian, Humba-haldashu and later Umman-aldash. 

3 ^ Babylonian Chronicle B, iii 39 ff.; R. C. Thompson, The Prisms of 
Esarhaddon and Ashurbampal (London, 1931), p. 15* 

^^Scheil, MSm.^ XI, 7S (No. loi); cf. Jequier, Mim.y VII, 38. In 
Mim,^ I, 127, Jequier describes a fragmentary unpublished stele of this 
ruler, and in Mem.^ I, 13 1, some unpublished bricks with inscriptions. 



i68 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


tain that hereafter Assyria befriended the successors 
of Huban-haltash II and opposed the family of Shil- 
hak-Inshushinak^ whom we may consider the legiti- 
mate Elamite sovereign. In the light of these and 
subsequent factS;, it is clear that henceforth there was 
no single ruler of great importance in Elam. On the 
contrarYj there were many kings^ rulers in Susa, in 
Madaktu, in Hidalu, and probably in other cities as 
well. The great days of Elam as an international pow- 
er were gone. Internecine warfare was rampant, and 
Assyria wisely played one sovereign off against an- 
other.3^ 

The failure of Esarhaddon’s first Egyptian cam- 
paign may have led Huban-haltash II to throw in his 
lot with the ruler of Susa. Doubtless from the vicinity 
of Bit Imbi and Der, Elamite troops fell upon Sippar, 
scarcely twenty-five miles from Babylon. In retalia- 
tion Esarhaddon instigated a plot which replaced 
Huban-haltash by his brother Urtaki (675-663), of 
whose loyalty he was nevertheless suspicious. Even- 
tually his fears were allayed, and the official archives 
at Nineveh received a copy of his letter to Urtaki, 
which is as full of innocuous phrases as is the formal 
conversation of one diplomat with another in our own 

33 Cf. Konig, Geschickte Elams ^ pp. 19 ff. 

34 Babyionian Chronicle B, iv 9 ff. 

35 Esarhaddon Chronicle, obv. 16-18, in Sidney Smith, Babylonian 
Historical Texts (London, 1924), pp. 12 fF. 

3 ® Omen query in Knudtzon, Gehete^ No. 76. 



A NEW ELAMITE KINGDOM 169 

day.'^" It was a striking tribute to the friendly rela- 
tions betw'eeii the two sovereigns that the statues of 
Ishtar and other gods^ long since captive in Elam, 
were returned, we presume voluntarily, to Jielr 
homes in Babylonia in 672 To and from Elam 

w’ent dispatches of private individuals and public 
oiEcials. A certain Pahuri, possibly an ambassador of 
LTtaki at the Assyrian court, received many letters 
written in his native Elamite, and some of these also 
made their w^ay into the royal archives.''*^ Even Susa, 
though not controlled by Urtaki, felt the influence of 
this free intercourse. A prism of Esarhaddon, shortly 
after it was composed in 673 b.c., found its way into 
the city,^^ and Assyrian omen texts were there copied 
in Akkadian and translated into the native tongued^ 
After 672, although the Elamite was often encouraged 
to violate his oaths of friendship,"^ peace between 
Urtaki and the Assyrian continued unbroken through- 
out the remaining lifetime of Esarhaddon. 

37 Harper, ABL^ No. 918; cf. Waterman, RCJEy 11 , 138 f. 

5 ® Babylonian Chronicle B, iv 17 fF.; Esarhaddon Chronicle, obv. 
21-23. 

39 Weissbach, *‘Susische ThontL^elchen,” IV (1902), 168-201; 
additional notes by Bork in BJ, V (1906), 401-4. None of the letters is 
dated, and their translation is exceedingly difficult. 

4® Scheil, Mem., XIV, 36 ff. 

4^ Scheil, MSm., XIV, 49 ff.; **Dechiffrement d’un document anzanite 
relatif aux presages,” RA, XIV (1917), 29 ff. 

42 Harper, ABL, No. 32S; cf. Waterman, RCAE, I, 226 ff. 



CHAPTER X 

MEDIAN AND PERSIAN CHIEFTAINS 

B y THE beginning of the seventh century b.c. 
strange faces began to appear in Iran. Strik- 
ing out from their '"Cimmerian darkness'' 
north of the Caucasus, the Gimirrai, as the Assyrians 
knew them, poured through the passes to the south. 
Some turned definitely westward, after striking 
obli(|uely the Haldian kingdom, and entered the 
Anatolian plateau. Others, together with or followed 
by Scythians or Ishguzai, passed to the east of Haldia 
and descended into the valleys of Iran. These were 
not harmless nomads seeking pasturage for their 
peaceful flocks. They were hard-riding, horse-borne 
robbers bent on plunder, unlettered, uncouth, but 
fearfully capable. 

The land of the Manneans, south and southeast of 
Lake Urmia, was the first halting-place for those who 
entered Iran. Esarhaddon of Assyria (681-668) knew 
that they had wrested from his control the city of 
Dur Enlil in this land and that Sharru Iqbi was in 
grave danger of falling into their hands."^ He knew 
also that his own troops, sent to punish the Mannean 
i^hsheri for hostile acts, were threatened by these 

^ Knudtzon, Geheie^ Nos. 19 f. and 16. 



MEDIAN AND PERSIAN CHIEFTAINS 17 1 


same CimmerianSj from whom no quarter could be 
expected^ Publicly he maintained that he scattered 
the Manneans and killed their ally^ Ishpakaia the 
Scythian p but years later his own son, in whose reign 
Ahsheri was still a rebel, informs us that the Alan- 
nean had seized Sharru Iqbi in the da)"s of his father. 
Assyrian administration of the land was therefore 
at an end. 

It was a serious loss. From this region of northwest 
Iran south to the Nisaean plain below Bisitiin, the 
Zagros had long been noted for its horses; the plain in 
front of modern Hamadan was no less famous. Far to 
the east within the territory of the distant Mede§ lay 
the land known in later times as the Choara, also 
famed for its riding horses, cattle, iocks, and camels. 
Hitherto the country of the Manneans with its fer- 
tile, well-watered valleys had furnished a large num- 
ber of the horses and draft animals used by the As- 
syrian army. That army, to maintain its mobility and 
to oppose with success the horse-riding Scythians and 
Cimmerians, required these animals. If the Mannean 
territory could no longer supply them, another region 
must be raided. This could be accomplished only by 
fast-riding cavalrymen penetrating ever more deeply 
into unknown terrain, hastily rounding up whatever 
animals could be found, and driving them with all 

® Ikid.j No. 24. 

3 R. C. Thompson, The Prisms of Esarhaddon md Ashurbanipal^ p. 19. 



172 


HISTORY OF Ex^RLY IRAN 


dispatch to Assyrian soil. There could be no attempt 
at conquest, and no provincial organization need 
therefore be set up. Speed alone was the essential 
item, horses and draft animals the sole object. 

We learn of such undertakings through the liver 
omen queries which Esarhaddon directed to the sun- 
god. Behind these texts, inscribed at the very mo- 
ment when success or failure was imminent, lies the 
stark reality of fear and danger. Medes, Scythians, 
and Cimmerians must all be considered. 

One series of raids set out from Bit Kari for Media. ^ 
Although we are ignorant concerning the exact des- 
tinations, it is possible that only the Nisaean and 
Hamadan plains were first entered. Farther and far- 
ther afield the attempt to procure mounts led the 
daring i\ssyrians. Finally it was determined to enter 
that fabulous region, the Choara, flanked by the Salt 
Desert and the snow-capped Demavend. We hear 
that cavalrymen have gone to gather horses from the 
land Kuk Kuma and the city Ramadani and are plan- 
ning to advance as far as Arri, the Choara, although 
Cimmerians and Manneans are expected to interfere.^ 
We discover that raiders who have advanced through 
a city Antarpati, known as Andirpattianu to Sargon, 
hope to arrive at Patush Arri ('Toward the Choara'') 
on the edge of the Salt Desert, although the chieftain 

^ Knudtzon, Gebete^ Nos. 30 f.; Klauber, Texte, Nos. 19 f. 

s Klauber, Texte^ No. 22. 



MEDIAN AND PERSIAN CHIEFTAINS 173 


Epariia or the people of Saparda may prove trouble- 
some.^ 

Such an undertaking could not be left unnoticed in 
the royal inscriptions which were written by 673 b.c. 
The words which describe it, pardonably boastful, 
may be thus paraphrased: 

As to the land Patush Arri" on the edge of the Salt Desert 
within the land of distant hledes, bordered by Mount Bikni (the 
Demavend), the mountain of lapis lazuli, whose soil none of the 
kings my fathers had trod, from it I carried oir the powerful city 
lords Shidir-parna (Chithrafarna or Tissaphernes) and Eparna 
together with their riding horses, cattle, hocks, and camels.^ 

We do not know how literally this may be interpreted.* 
The raid whose outcome the king view^ed so dubiously 
in the liver omen was doubtless the actual reason for 
the preparation of this part of the prism inscription, 
but even such a raid was noteworthy. No Assyrian 
had ever advanced farther into Iran, or indeed as far. 

In the same connection the royal texts declare that 
three Median city chieftains voluntarily presented 
themselves at Nineveh and begged to be reinstalled 
in their own, rebellious cities. These were Uppis of 
Partakka,^. Zanasana of Partukka, and Ramateia of 

^ Ibid. ^ No. 21. 

7 The Pateischoreis of Strabo Geogr. XV. iii. i. Cf. Spiegel in ZDMG^ 
XXXII (1878), 717; P. Haupt in JAOS, XLIV (1924), 158; Herzfeid 
in AMI, Vli (1934)5 26-28. 

^ R. C. Thompson, op. cii., p, 21. 

^ Against the usual equation of this name with Greek Paraetacene cf. 
Herzfeid in AMI, VII (1934), 16 and 28, 



174 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Uraka Zabarna. Again we are unable to judge the ac- 
curacy of the claim that these were restored to their 
cities with Assyrian help and subjected to taxes im- 
posed by Assyrian governors/ ° If it is true^ as one 
scholar has suggested, that the cities may be con- 
nected with the lands Parthia and Hyrcania,^^ a fairly 
accurate knowledge of geography must be presumed 
on the part of the Assyrian writer, though this, too, 
could have been obtained on such an ambitious raid 
as has already been described. 

Toward the last years of his reign Esarhaddon de- 
termined to recapture the onetime province of the 
Mafmeans. As we have already learned, the Cim- 
merians had occupied this territory in the days of his 
father; and although they now declared that the land 
belonged to Assyria, another informant of the king pro- 
claimed this an utter misstatement of fact. His let- 
ter to Esarhaddon is our only source, and even it gives 
expression to fear that the undertaking may prove 
unsuccessful. To judge from the next Assyrian ruler's 
difficulties with the land of the Manneans, his fear 
was altogether justified.^^ 

The fact, however, that Assyrian raids into terri- 
tories as far distant as the Choara could even be con- 
templated by the year 673 b.c. automatically pre- 
cludes the existence of a powerful Median kingdom, 

R. C. Thompson, op. cit.^ p. 21. 

“ Herzfeld in AMI^ VII (1934), 28 f. 

Harper, ABL^ No. 1237; cf. Waterman, RCAE^ II, 358 ff. 



MEDIAN AND PERSIAN CHIEFTAINS 175 

such as is described by Herodotus, at that date. Since 
the ''Father of History'' only too often has been 
proved correct where his critics thought him wrong, 
we might well examine what this fifth-century Greek 
has to relate, remembering that he obtained much of 
his information about Median origins from the de- 
scendants of a Mede, Harpagus. 

Once upon a time, says Herodotus,"^ when the 
Medes were living scattered in villages, there was 
among them an upright chieftain, Deioces, son of 
Phraortes, Having become an arbitrator in his own 
locality, widely recognized for his upright judgments, 
his services were in great demand throughout other 
parts of the land. Eventually he found that his duties 
were too onerous and troublesome, whereupon he re- 
fused to serve any longer in this capacity. The Medes 
then summoned an assembly and offered him the 
kingship. Once in power, Deioces forced his subjects 
to build Ecbatana, the modern Hamadan, with seven 
walls circumscribed about one another. Strict in the 
features which characterize the "Great King," Deio- 
ces was also severe but equitable in administration, 
so that the six great Median tribes'"^ willingly accept- 
ed his domination. His reign of fifty-three years was 
followed by the twenty-two-year rule of his son, 
Phraortes, who first made the Persians subject to the 

^3 i. ff. 

” The names of these tribes are successfully disposed of by Konig, 
Aiiesie GfScMchte, p. 6. 



176 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Medes and who ended his life in a premature attack 
on the Assyrians. Phraortes’ son, Cyaxares, had bare- 
ly ascended the throne when Scythians overthrew his 
kingdom; for twenty-eight years these rode around 
the country, plundering and committing violence. 
Finally Cyaxares regained control of Iran, brought to 
an end the kingdom of Assyria, and boasted a reign of 
forty years before he yielded to his son Astyages. The 
son ruled thirty-five years and then was overcome by 
Cyrus the Persian in 550 b.c.^’ 

We have already recognized Deioces in the Man- 
nean Daiaukku deported by Sargon of Assyria in 
715 B.c. The kingdom ascribed to him by Herodotus, 
whose chronology would assign Deioces to the years 
728-675 B.C., did not, therefore, exist. The accuracy 
with which the Greek renders the names of Deioces 
and his successors should, however, warn us not to 


^5 The terminus ad quern of Median history is established by the Nabu- 
naid-Cyrus Chronicle, 

The king list of Ctesias (ed, Muller, pp. 41 ff., from Diodorus Siculus 
History ii. 32 ff.), is but a curious amplification of that in the account of 
Herodotus, This physician-historian at the court of Artaxerxes II, where 
the “royal parchments” were at his disposal, merely doubled the number 
of kings given by Herodotus. Though his names are genuinely Iranian, 
his history is practically without any foundation; for a critical discussion 
see Prasek, Geschichte^ I, 105 ff. The following table (see Rawlinson, The 
Seven Great Monarchies [New York, 1885], II, 85 and 571) indicates the 
Cnidian’s procedure: 


Herodotus 


I. Anarchy 

35 years 

I. Arbaces 

2. Deioces 

53 

2. Maudaces 

3. Phraortes 

22 

5. Arbianes 

4, Scythians 

28 


5. Cyaxares 

40 

6. Artaeus 

0. Astyages 

35 

9, Aspandas 


Ctesias 


28 years 

3. Sosarmns 

30 years 

SO 

4. Artycas 

SO 

22 

7. Artynes 


40 

8. Astibaras 

40 

38 




MEDIAN AND PERSIAN CHIEFTAINS 177 


dispose of his other data too lightly. The unfortunate 
Daiaukku may actually have been pictured to succes- 
sive generations of iMedes as the founder of their dy- 
nasty. Nevertheless^ we enter actual history only 
with the alleged accession of his son, Phraortes, whose 
dates were known to Herodotus as 675-653 b.c. 

Over a century and a half later, when Darius the 
Great w^as striving so diligently to win the Persian 
throne, a certain Phraortes declared that his real 
name was Khshathrita and that he was of the family 
of Cyaxares.^^ Here, then, is the key to the riddle of 
the Herodotean Phraortes: his name likewise was 
Khshathrita. Whether the latter was merely^ his 
throne name"' or whether Herodotus knew that he 
too, like the contemporary of Darius, was actually 
named Phraortes,"^ need not concern us. We have, 
however, no occasion to doubt that his active years 
began about 675 b.c., especially when we meet him in 
the liver omen queries dating from the last years of 
Esarhaddon under an Assyrianized name form, Kash- 
tariti."^ 

When we "first meet Kashtariti, wEom w^e shall 
henceforth designate as Khshathrita, he is not king 
of Media. Instead, he is the chieftain of the city Kar 

Bisitun inscription of Darius, ii 14 iF.; cf. Weissbach, Die Keil- 
insckriften der Achdmeniden (Leipzig, 1911), pp. zS f. 

So Prasek, GeschichtSy I, 140. 

So Konig, j teste Geschlchtey pp. 29 f. 

^9 So a keen deduction of Konig, ibid. 



178 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Kashshi, the name of which betrays its location in the 
old Kassite homeland in the central Zagros. The He- 
rodotean story of the founding of the Median capital 
at Ecbatana^^ is still in the future. 

The liver omen queries describe his activities rather 
fully. We find him and his Median troops attacking 
the cities Karibti and Ushishi/'' or threatening to in- 
tercept Assyrian raiders and messengers who have 
been sent into Media. We discover that he is en- 
deavoring to entice the Median city chieftain Mami- 
ti-arshu into plotting against Ashur^^ or joining with 
Dusanni of Saparda, a land long since conquered by 
Sargon and assigned to the Harhar province, in an 
attempt to plunder the cities Sandu and Kilman.^^ 
Finally, he stands revealed as the leader of a coalition 
of Medes, Cimmerians, and Manneans who are 
threatening to undermine the entire Assyrian pro- 
vincial administration in the Zagros. Unfortunately, 
the texts which picture these events are fragmentary 
in the extreme, but one well-preserved tablet yields 
the name of the city Kishassu, the Kishesim which 

In Old PersiaHj Hanginatana, usually interpreted as as- 

sembly.” Professor A. Poebel suggests that the name may rather mean 
something like *‘fortress(?) of the Medes.” 

Klauben Texte^ No. i ; Knudtzon^ Gebete^ No. 6. 

Klauber, Texte^ Nos. 3, 12-14; Knudtzon, Gehete^ No. 5. 

Knudtzon, Gebete^ No. 2. 

Klauber, Texte^ Nos. 4 and 7. 

=5 Ibid.^ No. 8; cf. also Nos. 5 and 13; Knudtzon, Gebete, No. 4. 



MEDIAN AND PERSIAN CHIEFTAINS 179 

Sargoii conquered in 716 Doubt the kingship 

of Khshathrita as we may, in the light of these facts 
we cannot question the important role he played 
within the Zagros during the latter years of Esarhad- 
doii, the very date which the chronology of Herodo- 
tus gives to Phraortes. 

Herodotus likewise declares that Phraortes was the 
first Mede to bring the Persians into subjection. This 
statement also may be actual history, but Ave must 
first inquire into the facts concerning these same Per- 
sians. Who were they and whence did they come ? 

As early as 815 b.c. Indo-Iranians from Parsua, 
west of Lake Urmia, had descended the valleys of the 
Zagros toward Elam. The wanderers found a new 
home to the northeast of Susa not far from the Elam- 
ite land Anzan; to their new habitat they gave the 
name Parsamash or Parsumash in memory of the land 
they had left behind. By 700 their leader was Ha- 
khamanish or Achaemenes, whom the later Persian 
monarchs claimed as eponymous ancestor. Presuma- 
hljy he and his followers participated with Elam in 
the defeat of 'Sennacherib at Halule in fipe, for the 
Assyrian reports that Parsu(m)ash and Anzan w^ere 
among his foesP’^ 

Some years later, perhaps about 675 b.c., Achae- 
menes yielded to his son Chishpish or Teispes. 
Promptly the Persian descended upon Anzan, wEere 
the influence of the Elamite kings had waned and 

Knudtzon, Gehete^ No. i. See above, p. 166. 



i8o HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 

to which Shilhak-Inshushinak II had not even laid 
claim. Henceforth Teispes could bear the title ''king 
of the city Anshan/’ a variant spelling of the name. 
Had he looked about him he would have realized that 
danger to his newly won kingdom could scarcely come 
from Elam^ for even Esarhaddon in Assyria knew 
that the Mede Khshathrita with his Cimmerian allies 
was far more to be feared. This coalition threatened 
the city Sissirtu on the border of Ellipi in the Harhar 
province.^^ Esarhaddon was concerned about his own 
territory Bit Hamban at the junction of the modern 
Alwand and Diyala Rivers^ almost in Babylonia; he 
likewise knew that the Median forces^ supplemented 
by Cimmerian and Scythian troops, were descending 
upon Parsumash to the southeast of Bit Hamban.^^ 
In the light of Herodotus’ declaration that Phraortes 
first subdued the Persians, we might well assume that 
the statements of the Greek and of Esarhaddon were 
based on fact, and that Khshathrita about 670 b.c. 
reduced Teispes to the status of a vassal king. 

Though successful in this direction, the Mede had 
still other territories of Iran to conquer before he 
could be declared undisputed master of the plateau. 
Years earlier he himself had led an attack on Sharru 
Iqbi in the Mannean land, but since that time a new 
wave of Cimmerians and Scythians had occupied this 
region. Under the leadership of Ahsheri the Man- 

Knudtzonj Gebete, No. 72. 

29 Klauber, Texte^ No. 38; cf. JAOS^ LII (1932), 304. 



MEDIAN AND PERSIAN CHIEFTAINS iSi 


neans likewise had begun by 660 b.c. to trouble 
Ashurbanipal, who determined on their subjection. 
Before the latter's rapidly moving forces xAhsheri de- 
serted his capital^ Izertu, for Atrana and left Sliairii 
Iqbi and other cities to the mercy of the invaders. A 
part of the land was garrisoned with Assyrian troops 
and reorganized as a province. The unfortunate 
Ahsheri was immediately murdered by disgruntled 
subjects and a pro-xAssyrian ruler found in his son 
Ualli;'”^® henceforth the Manneaiis w^ere allies of xAs- 
syria against the Medes, and Khshathrita found him- 
self debarred from their country. 

While pursuing xAhsheri, Ashurbanipal appears to 
have entered Median territory. A city chieftain, Bi- 
ris-hatri, with his two sons, was captured and deport- 
ed to Nineveh, a number of the near-by cities were 
wasted, and the power of Assyria w^as greatly en- 
hanced. 

Thus defied, Khshathrita may himself have de- 
cided to attack Assyria, as Herodotus relates. If this 
were indeed so, his ambitions far exceeded his capa- 
bility as a warrior. xAlthough no inscriptional evi- 
dence records such a blunder, the event is not in itself 
improbable. His death, which Herodotus would date 
to 653 B.C., may well have occurred as he was attack- 
ing an xAssyrian border city. 

30 Cf. Harper, ABL^ No. 1109 (Waterman, RCAE, II, 272 t.); Piep- 
korn, Asimri/anipal, I, 50-5 5. 

3 ^ So, if mat-a-a be interpreted as { 7 natu)Mad~a-a; the account is in 
Cylinder B, recently edited by Piepkorn, Askurbanipal, I, 56 f. 



1 82 HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 

Carefully his followers entombed his body in one 
of the rock-hewn graves still discernible in the moun- 
tains he had known so well. One tomb is carved from 
the rock in which Anubanini, king of Lullubiumj had 
set his relief^ just off the main road leading from Iran 
to Babylonia. Others are located near Bisitun or in the 
northern part of the Shehrizor or still farther norths 
just south of Lake Urmia.^^ Today we may be unable 
to decide which of these tombs is that of Khshathrita, 
but all appear to be pre-Achaemenian in date and 
may with great probability be attributed to early 
^Median rulers. 

The son of Khshathrita, Uvakhshatra or Cyaxares, 
was heir apparent and, had all gone well, would doubt- 
less have succeeded to the leadership. But Scyth- 
ians, whom we have already had occasion to meet 
within Iran, had not been sufficiently taken into con- 
sideration. Did they now turn against their erstwhile 
Median compatriots and prevent the accession of 
Cyaxares, as Herodotus tells us ? The Greek’s tale of 
Scythian devastations and plunderings may well be 
true; their twenty-eight-year domination of Iran 
(653“625), which a true Mede would almost believe 
to be ''all of Western Asia,” may therefore be histori- 
cal fact. 

Although we know only too little of their adminis- 

32 E. Herzfeld, Am Tor von Asien (Berlin, 1920), pp. 6-16; C. J. 
Edmonds, ‘A Tomb in Kurdistan,*' Iraq^ I (1934), 190 f, A second tomb 
described by Edmonds, ibid.^ pp. 185-89, is later in date. 



MEDIAN AND PERSIAN CHIEFTAINS 183 

tratiotij we are well informed concerning the weapons 
they carried and the trappings with which they 
equipped their horses; for the period of the Scythians 
and Cimmerians w^as roughly contemporaneous with 
that of the manufacture of many of the so-called 
‘Turistan bronzes,'' whose rediscovery has lately 
challenged the attention of the artistic world. 

Specimens of Babylonian w^orkmanship had, from 
the dawn of history, found their way into the Zagros 
and Iran, there to be imitated and copied. As early 
as the dynasty of xAgade a bronze bowd with the name 
of Sharkalisharri and a spear point with the legend of^ 
his contemporary ishakku of Susa, Puzur-Inshushi- 
nak, had reached the Zagros. Through the Third Dy- 
nasty of Ur and the reigns of Larsa and Isin, import 
pieces were still highly prized in the mountains, where 
they set the tradition for such objects and initiated a 
craft of bronze manufacture which continued uninter- 
ruptedly throughout the Kassite period. This native 
work waSj how^ever, decidedly inferior to that of the 
objects brought by the invaders from beyond the 
Caucasus in the early years of the first millennium. 
At that time bits for the horses and decorations for 
the harness, practical and votive handles for maces, 
and short swords with riveted grips were manufac- 
tured with great artistic and technical skill. For mo- 
tives and techniques their makers were indebted to 
the older cultures of Babylonia and Elam, to the new 
world of xAssyria, and, most of all, to the northern and 



184 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


possibly Nordic elements from the Caucasian^ Trans- 
caucasian, and Transcaspian regions. The manufac- 
ture of the ‘'Luristan bronzes/’ as can easily be 
proved by those bearing names of kings of the Second 
Isin Dynasty, was flourishing by 1000 b . c .; parallels 
with objects from the north and west prove that the 
technique lasted well into Achaemenian times. But 
it was the period of the northern Cimmerian and 
Scythian invaders which saw the highest skill of the 
Iranian bronze-workers.^^ 

33 Cf. Andre Godard, Les Bronzes du Luristan (**Ars i\siatica,” VoL 
^XVII); R. Dussaud is preparing an elaborate study for the forthcoming 
survey of Persian art. Cf. also A. U. Pope in Illustrated London News^ 
October 22, 1932, pp. 61 3-1 5; for the inscriptions see iifid.y October 29, 
1932, pp. 666 f.j and Weidner in AOFy VIII (1932/33), 258 f. 



CHAPTER XI 

THE ECLIPSE OF ELAM 

T O AN Elamite living in the year 668 b.c. the 
division of one empire into two kingdoms, 
with Shamash-shum-ukin in Babylon and 
Ashurbanipal in x-lssyria, could only be interpreted as 
a confession of inner weakness. Consequently Urtaki, 
the ruler of a portion of Elam, though pro-Assyrian in 
his earlier years, may now have attempted to tesvthe' 
strength of this divided political entity on his west. 
Perhaps he instigated the ill-starred venture of Tan- 
daia, a village chieftain of Kirbit, who plundered 
lamutbal in the vicinity of Der/ A year or two later 
the crown prince of Elam, Huban-nugash, son of Ur- 
taki, was mightily feared in Babylonia; this we learn 
from no less a personage than Shamash-shum-ukin 
himself,^ It was Urtaki, however, who inspired Ashur- 

^ Babylonian Chronicle B, iv 37; Esarhaddon Chronicle, rev. 1 5. 
For the Ashurbanipal inscriptions cf. Piepkorn, Ashurbanipal^ I, i4ff. 
and 48 f.; for references to the later prisms see Streck, Assurbanipal^ 
p. 791. Hereafter only the earliest reference to events mentioned in the 
texts of Ashurbanipal will be cited, for this is always closer to the truth; 
c£ Olmstead, Assyrian Historiography^ pp. 53-59. 

® Harper, ABL^ No. 1385; cf. Waterman, RCAE, H, 466 ff. The at- 
tempt to fit letters from the royal archives into the historical picture 
starts with Olmstead, History of Assyria^ pp. 431-88; cf. also the brief 
study of J. Schawe, “Untersuchung der Elambriefe aus dem Archiv As- 
surbanipais’’ (Inaug.-Diss., Berlin, 1927). 

185 



i86 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


banipal's ire. The events leading to the outbreak of 
hostilities took the following course. 

An Elamite general with the good Babylonian 
name Marduk-shum-ibni formed a conspiracy against 
Ashurbanipal which included a high official of Assyria 
and a chieftain of the Aramean tribe of the Gambuli. 
Ashurbanipal claimed that he himself was not hostile 
to Urtaki^ whom he had befriended in a time of 
famine^ but that the latter had been duped by the lies 
of his subordinates . 3 

This may have been close to the truth; but doubt- 
less it would be more accurate to state that Urtaki, 
likeffiis brother before him, had now come under the 
influence of another king of Elam, the ruler of Susa. 
In his brother’s time this sovereign had been Shilhak- 
Inshushinak II; a son of the latter, Tepti-Huban-In- 
shushinak {ca, 663-653), now sat on the throne. To 
cement his alliance with Urtaki, a diplomatic mar- 
riage was arranged; and henceforth Te-Umman, as 
the xAssyrians knew him, was the ‘‘brother” of Ur- 
taki.^ In connection with Urtaki’s defection from the 
Assyrian cause Tepti-Huban urged the inhabitants of 
the Sealands to desert their elderly pro-Assyrian 
ruler, Naid-Marduk, established there in Esarhad- 
don’s time, for one with Elamite leanings. Loyally 

3 Piepkorn, Ashurbanifal^ I, 56 fF.; cf. Harper, ABL^ No. 295 (Water- 
man, RCAE^ I, 204 fF.), which recounts the Assyrian *s favors to Elam. 

^ So in Harper, ABL^ No. 576 (Waterman, RCAE^ I, 408 IF.). The 
Te-Umman, bowman of the HaUalla^ (name supplied from Harper, ABL^ 
No. 520 obv. 15), of the relief inscription in Streck, Assurbanipal^ pp. 
334 f., belongs to the time of Tammaritu. 



THE ECLIPSE OF ELAM 


the Sealanders refused;^ in retaliation, one of their 
bridges was seized and burned/ and the Elamite be- 
came more insistent after Naid-Marduk’s death. Al~ 
ready> he declared, the Chaldean tribes of the Targi- 
batu, Nahal, Dutai, and Bananu had accepted Elam- 
ite rule, and they should prepare to do likewise." 
This was an ultimatum, and subsequent events 
proved that it was not in vain. Together with Ertaki 
he conceived a bold attack. Urtaki was to enter Bab- 
ylonia and support the rebel Gambuli chieftain Bel- 
iqisha; Tepti-Huban himself was to send Elamite 
troops to recover the Sealands.® 

Ashurbanipal was greatly concerned. A messenger 
sent to his onetime ally Urtaki returned with the 
amazing news that the Elamites were already march- 
ing into Babylonia, covering the land of Akkad like a 
swarm of grasshoppers. Nevertheless, the Assyrian 
need not have been dismayed. Sickness and disease, or, 
as he interpreted it, the pest-gods Nergal and Ishum, 
deprived the Elamites of Urtaki; and his demise in 
663 B.c. was quickly followed by the deaths of his 
Babylonian confrkes.® Thus far, Assyria appeared to 
be in control of the situation. 

s Harper, ABL^ No. 576 (cf. Waterman, RCAE^ I, 408 ff.). 

^ Letter from Naid-Marduk to Ashurbanipars mother. Harper, ABL^ 
No. 917 (Waterman, RCAE^ II, 136 ff.). 

7 Harper, ABL^ No. 1114 (Waterman, RCAE, II, 276 f.). 

^ On the activity in Bit lakin see Harper, ABL^ No. 1131 (Waterman, 
RCAE, II, 288 f.). 

9 Piepkorn, Ashurhanipal^ I, 58 ff. 



HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


The very reverse was true. With the death of Ur- 
taki the king of Susa, Tepti-Huban-Inshushinak, was 
at once recognized as the ruler of the now united 
land. Naturally his first task was the eradication of 
all possible rivals. The sons of Huban-haltash II, Ku- 
durru and Paru, together with the sons of Urtaki, 
Huban-nugash, Huban-a^pi, and Tammaritu, fled the 
country to Assyria, and with them departed sixty 
courtiers and numerous archers. Ashurbanipal wel- 
comed them with open arms; their fathers before 
them had been rulers of a part of Elam through As- 
^ Syrian help, and they too might be restored. Conse- 
quently, though he received at his court Huban-tah- 
rah and Nabu-damiq as ambassadors of the Elamite 
and pictured them in relief as a fat old eunuch and a 
youthful official,'® he refused their demand for the 
fugitives’ extradition. 

Safe on his throne, Tepti-Huban-Inshushinak erect- 
ed a new temple to Inshushinak in Susa." On a 
stele he told how he had conquered the lands of the 
Balahute and Lallari with the help of Huban and In- 
shushinak," though another text credited his success 
to the deity Pinikir.'^ An inscription on a huge stone 
enumerated the high officials of court and temple to- 
gether with their offerings and gifts. Those mentioned 
include a high priestess of Huban, priests of Napir, 

Piepkorn, Ashurbanipal^ I, 6o ff. ; Layard, Monuments of Nineveh^ 
4 d ser. (London, 1853), PL 49; Streck, Assurhanipal^ pp. 316 fF. 

“ Schell, MSm.j III, 98-99 (Nos. 60-61); cf. Jequier, Mem.^ I, 131. 

Ill, 96 (No. 59). Mem., V, 84 (No. 87). 



THE ECLIPSE OF ELAM 1S9 

Shuda^ and Pinikir^ and men of Anzan and Parasliu^ 
perhaps the very lands now controlled by descendants 
of the Iranian Achaemenes/-^ 

Thus fortified^ the Elamite once again turned to 
thoughts of conquest; but in July of 653 he was seized 
with epilepsy^ doubtless induced by family in term ar- 
riage, although xAshurbanipal in Assyria attributed it 
to evil planned for him by the moon-god Sin. Xever- 
theless^ the Elamite began the attack in August by 
encamping near Bit Imbi and threatening Der. As- 
syrian troops advanced in September to meet him on 
the Ulai, the modern Karkhah, and he retreated from 
Bit Imbi to Susa^ then returned to offer resistance at 
Tell Tuba .^5 Early in the conflict one of his generals, 
Simburu, deserted to his enemies. The king’s nephew 
Urtaki was wounded by an arrow and begged decapi- 
tation from his xAssyrian captors, while the eunuch 
Ituni, but recently an Elamite ambassador at the 
xAssyrian court, attempted to cut his own bowstring 
when he saw the battle turning against him, but was 
beheaded. Tepti-Huban and a son fled from the me- 
lee, but their chariot overturned and both were killed 
outright. The Ulai River was blocked with the 
corpses of the slain, wrote Ashurbanipal, and dead 
bodies filled the plain of Susa. Exaggerated as the 
Assyrian account may be — and successive editions of 

^4 Scheil, MSm., XI, 80 f. (No. 102). 

Piepkorn, Ashurbanipal, I, 62-69; for the dating cf. J. Mayr, ibid., 
pp. 105-9. For inscriptions on or intended for reliefs picturing this battle 
cf. Streck, Assurbanipal, pp. 310-17 and 3^2-33, with references to the 
reliefs themselves. 



190 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


the prism inscriptions added still more gruesome de- 
tails — the battle appears to have been a catastrophe 
for Elam. Tepti-Huban-Inshushinak^ king of united 
Elam, having been slain with his (eldest?) son, i\s- 
syria enthroned at Madaktu Huban-nugash, son of 
Urtaki, a refugee in Nineveh who had been brought 
along by the army for just such an emergency. To 
make matters worse, a revolt in Hidalu overthrew 
that city’s ruler, Shutruk-Nahhunte; and another son 
of Urtaki, Tammaritu, likewise an Elamite refugee in 
Assyria, ascended the throne there.^^ The greater part 
of the country was now ruled by men who were at 
leas*!: nominally pro-Assyrian. 

Susa, however, appears to have escaped the fate of 
other Elamite centers, and in all probability the local 
successor to Tepti-Huban-Inshushinak was Adda- 
hamiti-Inshushinak (653-648), son of an otherwise 
unknown Hutran-tepti. His inscriptions abound in 
Akkadian loan words and pseudo-ideograms, indi- 
cating a large Semitic element among his subjects. 
He calls himself prince of Elam and of Gisati, which 
may be his way of writing the Akkadian kishshatiy 
‘"totality”; he honors the deities Huban, Kiririsha, 
Inshushinak, and Ruhuratir and tells of accomplish- 
ments in the lands Bessit and Shepshilak.^^ Pictured 
on a stele, his garment and helmet with jutting visor 

^^Piepkorn, Ashurbanipal^ I, 70 f.; relief inscriptions: Streck, Assur- 
banipal^ pp. 324 f, 

^7 Scheii, Mim.^ XI, 77 (No. ioo 5 ), and III, 92 (No. 58); cf. Pezard 
in Eabyloniaca, VIII (1924), 1-26. Cf. also Scheii, MSm.y XI, 83, and 
P6zard in Babyloniaca, VIII, 4 and PI. 2. 



THE ECLIPSE OF ELAM 


191 


remind us of Haiini of Aiapir; his nose is short and 
straight, his beard hangs in long strands/^’ 

For the short space of eight months Huban-nugash 
in Madaktii remained loyal to the monarch who had 
placed him on the throne. When Shamash-shum-iikin 
revolted from Ashurbanipal, the Elamite promptly 
deserted his benefactor, encouraged various Arame- 
ans to support Babylon, and sent his own generals, 
Attametu and Neshu, into the plain. He likewise 
urged Undasi,"^ another son of Tepti-Huban-In~ 
shushinak, to avenge his father’s death. 

From Assyria Ashurbanipal quickly apprised other* 
Elamites that he was aware of their defection. He 
pointed to the fate of the Elamite general Simburu, a 
deserter to ^Assyria at the battle of Tell Tuba, since 
killed for antLAssyrian activities. Finally, he ex- 
pressed his dissatisfaction with his Elamite informers, 
who remained inactive though they knew^ that Hu- 
ban-nugash was now^ breaking his oaths of loyalty to 
xAssyria and was taking the part of Babylon in the 
civil war.^° Meantime the Elamite troops of Huban- 
nugash concentrated near Der, but the ensuing battle 
with Assyrian forces stationed near Alangisi ended in 
utter rout.^" 

Relief and inscription: Scheil, Mem.^ XI, 76 (No. looA). 

Elamite hypocoristic form of Untash- . . . . ; Attametu is another 
Adda-hamiti- 

Harper, ABL^ No. 1380 (Waterman, RCAE, 11 , 462 ff.). 

Piepkorn, Ashiirhanipal^ I, 76 f. For the location of Mangisi near 
Der cf. the text in Nies and Keiser, Babylonian Inscriptions in the Collec- 
tion of James B, N'ieSj Vol. II (New Haven, 1920), No. 33, 1 !. 6 f. 



192 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Revolt at once flamed in the mountains. Nabu-beL 
shumate, who was making a pretense of loyalty to 
Assyria in the Sealands^ knew that the Elamite cities 
had rebelled from their sovereign.^^ Hastily Huban- 
nugash sought alliance elsewhere^ but this time he 
turned not to Assyria but to his brother in Hidalu. 
He and his son entered the city, where they met peo- 
ple of the land of Parsumash; with them were mes- 
sengers of the land Rashi and an ambassador of 
Shamash-shum-ukin, who was also seeking support."^^ 
The revolt was nevertheless successful, and early in 
. 651 Huban-nugash was dethroned by another Tam- 
maritu, nephew of Huban-haltash II. 

The change in rulers did not result in a change in 
policy. Like his predecessor, Tammaritu decided to 
support Shamash-shum-ukin in Babylon; at his court, 
by March of 651, he received Nabu-bel-shumate,''^ 
now so openly anti-Assyrian that a year later Bel- 
ibni, governor of the Sealands, was commissioned by 
Ashurbanipal to apprehend him.^® Undeterred, the 
Elamite started his own troops on the move and 
threatened to overrun the Nippur region in central 

22 Harper, JBL^ No, 839 (W^aterman, RCAE^ II, 82 fF.). 

23 Harper, ABLy No. 1309 (Waterman, RCAE, II, 410 fF,). 

24 See Table IV at the end of this volume. The genealogy is made clear 
by the text in Streck, Assurhanipaly pp. 180 f., obv. 30-34; cf. also Bauer, 
Das Inschrijtenwerk Assurbanipals (Leipzig, 1933), II, 51 f., obv. I4. 

Klauber Tei^tSy No, 105. 

Harper, ABLy Nos. 289 and 998 (Waterman, RCAEy I, 200 f., and 
n, 190 fF.). 



THE ECLIPSE OF ELAM 193 

Babylonia.- ' Ashurbanipal attempted to forestall this 
by sending one of his generals into Elam;^'”^ simul- 
taneously he was advised to deprive Tammaritu of 
assistance from the region of Hidalu. The people of 
Parsumash^ declared his informant, were not advanc- 
ing to the aid of the Elamites, although Tammaritu 
had urged them to do so; if the Assyrian forces under 
IMarduk-shar-iisur were to advance quickly, the land 
of Elam would become his possession.*^ 

In all probability no Assyrians entered Elam at this 
time. Instead, a native general, Indabigash, led an 
insurrection against Tammaritu early in 649. The be- 
ginning of the revolt, which found Xabu-bel-shuifiate* 
in the region of Hidalu at the city Hudimirip'^ was 
known even to Bel-ibni, into whose hands fell Tam- 
maritu and his numerous retinue as they were fleeing 
from Indabigash. 

The accession of Indabigash at Madaktu gave an 
unexpected turn to the affair. Ashurbanipal had no 
means of knowing the new ruler’s attitude toward As- 
syria; consequently, while awaiting a reply to his let- 
ter to the new sovereign,^^ he ordered Marduk-shar- 

27 Harper, JBL^ No. 1195 (an omen) ; cf. Waterman, RCAE^ II, 326 f. 
Cf. Piepkorn, Ashurha?iipal^ I, 7S f. and 102 f. 

Harper, JBL, No. 960 (Waterman, RCAE^ II, 164 f.). 

Harper, ABL^ No. 961 (Waterman, RCAE^ II, 166 £). 

Harper, ABL^ No. 521 (Waterman, RCAE^ 1 , 366 ff.). On Hudimiri 
see below, p. 204. 

3 ^ Harper, ABL, No. 2S4 (Waterman, RCAE, 1 , 196 f.). 

32 Harper, ABL^ No, 1151 (Waterman, RCAEy 11 , 300 fF.j. 



194 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


usur to bring Tammaritu and his retinue to the court. 
There they made abject surrender^ and their lives 
were spared in the hope that they might prove useful 
to Assyria at some future time.^^ Shuma^ a son of 
Tammaritu’s sister, fled from Elam to the Tahha 
tribe of Arameans, from whom BeLibni secured him 
and promised to send him to Nineveh. It would be 
wise, continued the viceroy of the Seaiands, if xAshur- 
banipal were to declare a trade embargo among the 
Puqudu against the Elamites until political matters 
were on a firmer footing.^^ 

Indabigash appears at first to have responded 
favorably to the overtures of Assyria, goon he 
too became an ally of Nabu-bel-shumate,^^ who ven- 
tured into the alluvium, where he captured several 
Assyrians, including Marduk-shar-usur. xAt once the 
true state of affairs was evident, and Ashurbanipal 
was deluged with pleas for cavalry at Nippur and 
Uruk to prevent further raids. 

Tammaritu now saw his opportunity. Boasting his 
courage, he begged to be sent with Assyrian troops to 
Der, within easy striking distance of Madaktu; his 
plea was obviously a request for reinstatement as 

33 Piepkorn, Ashurbanipal^ I, 78 ff. 

34 Harper, ABL^ No. 282 (Waterman, RCAE, I, 194 f.). 

3 s Piepkorn, Ashurbanipal^ I, 80 f. 

3 ® Harper, ABLy Nos. 1323 and 1167 (Waterman, RCAE, II, 4221. 
and 308 f.) ; Piepkorn, Ashurbanipal^ I, 102 f. 

37 Harper, ABLy Nos. 963 and 622 (Waterman, RCAEy 11 , 166 ff., and 

I, 434 



THE ECLIPSE OF ELAM 


L95 

king of that cityA® Ashurbanipal considered this a 
good investment and moved his troops toward i3er 
with an ultimatum to Indabigash that unless he soon 
repented of his ways he too should suffer the fate of 
Tepti-Huban-InshushinakA*^ This was not the As- 
syrian’s only plan. By July of 648 he was in commu- 
nication with an Elamite general named Huban-shi- 
bar^ upon whom he urged further negotiations with 
Bel-ibni.-^® The viceroy understood the situation. He 
knew that Huban-shibar was stirring up a revolt in 
Elam and that if the Assyrians now concentrating at 
Der were to advance into the mountains Indabigash 
would most certainly be dethroned. But haste washes- * 
sential if all these affairs were to be brought to a suc- 
cessful conclusion. He himself was sending additional 
troops to Der^ for the king of Elam was stationed in 
Bit Imbi.^" 

From the days of Tepti-Huban-Inshushinak’s 
death at the hands of AshurbanipaFs w^arriors, the 
ruler of Susa had remained unrecognized in the royal 
inscriptions of Assyria^ although Adda-hamiti-Inshu- 
shinak was oocupying the throne. By 648 the latter’s 
son, Huban-haltash III (648-636?)^ had come to 

3 ® Harper, ABL^ No. 1148 (Waterman, RCAE^ II, 298 fF.j. 

39 Cylinder C, viii 47-63, in Streck, Assurbanipal^ pp. 142 f.; cf. LAR^ 
Voi. n' § 878. 

Harper, ABLy No. 1170 (Waterman, RCAE, II, 310 f.). 

^ Harper, ABLy Nos. 460 and 1063 (Waterman, RCAEy I, 320 f., and 
11, 238 f.). 



196 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


power^ and now he frustrated Assyria’s attempt to 
make Tammaritu king again in Madaktu by becom- 
ing king of this city as well as of his own Susa.^^ He 
realized that Elam and Assyria need not be enemies 
solely on account of Nabu-bel-shumate; therefore he 
summoned his confederates and advised them to sur- 
render the Chaldean, whose capture Assyria deemed 
so imperative. But civil war in Elam during the pre- 
ceding century had brought kingship to an all-time 
low ebb; witness the fact that Huban-haltash could 
only advise, not command. Unfortunately for his own 
future, his advice was disregarded by his nominal sub- 
" ordinates. Nabu-bel-shumate continued alive and 
free, and nothing remained but to prolong the useless 
combat with Assyria.^s 

Sure of a refuge in Elam, Nabu-bel-shumate hired 
troops among the Hilmu, Pillatu, and lashian tribes 
of Arameans on the eastern shore of the Persian Gulf 
and crossed the waters to harass Bel-ibni in the Sea- 
lands. Bel-ibni retaliated by sending across the Gulf 
four hundred bowmen, who killed several hundred 
oxen of the Hilmu and Pillatu; but Nabu-bel-shumate 
remained untouched in the city Hupapanuri^ An As- 
syrian raiding party captured treasures belonging to 
the sheikh of the land Bananu in the land Nahal. 

^ Cylinder C, ix 89 ff.; cf. Bauer, Das Inschriftenwerk Assurbantpals ^ 
11 , 17 f., earlier in Streck, Assurbanipal^ pp. 144 f.; LAR, Vol. II, § 879, 

Harper, ABL^ No. 281, obv. 23-31 (Waterman, RCAE^ I, 192 f.). 

Harper, ABL, No. 1000 (Waterman, RCAEy II, 192 fF.)* 



THE ECLIPSE OF ELAM 


^'97 

Another body^ one hundred and fifty in number, cap- 
tured one hundred and thirty prisoners in the country 
across the Takkatap River; when they tried to retrace 
their steps, they were met by three hundred bowmen 
of the Halat tribe, who attempted an ambush on the 
river at Xahal, twenty-eight hours’ marching time 
from the Sealands. Fortunately onh' twenty were 
wounded, the Elamite loss being considerably more. 
Bel-ibni himself went to the rescue with six hundred 
bowmen and fifty cavalrymen and secured fifteen 
hundred cattle belonging to the king of Elam and the 
sheikh of the Pillatu. Not all could be brought back 
to Babylonia, for many were drowned in the Guif'Sncf 
others were killed on the spot; but Bel-ibni managed 
to send a hundred of the best with forty drovers to 
AshurbanipaFs court. 

The small numbers of combatants participating in 
these raids and coimterraids indicate that conditions 
in this region were then not unlike those found by 
travelers crossing southern Babylonia in the nine- 
teenth century after Christ. Yet the letters of Bel- 
ibni and his Yellow^ governors to Ashurbanipal were 
retouched by Assyrian scribes to produce the cele- 
brated ‘‘seventh campaign” in the so-called “Rassam 
Cylinder” inscription of that monarch. This alleged 
campaign is confused; it becomes clear only when we 

Harper, ABL^ No. 520 (Waterman, RCAEy I, 364 fF.). 

Cf., for example, W. K. Loftus, Travels and Researches in Chaidaea 
and Susiana (New York and London, 1S57), pp, 331 and 390 ff. 



HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


19S 

realize that xAssyria, after the revolt of Shamash- 
shum-iikin had been brought to an end, was attacking 
Elam from at least two bases, from the Sealands in 
the south and from the city of Der in the north. The 
objective of the southern thrust was Susa; that of the 
northern drive was the northern capital of Elam, 
Madaktu, reached through the land Rashi with its 
center at Bit Imbi. 

The activities in the southern sector concern us 
first. An Assyrian garrison of five hundred men sta- 
tioned in Zabdanu was ordered to raid Elam. It ad- 
vanced to Irgidu, four hours' distance from Susa, 
Tcilfed the sheikh of the lashian tribe and his many rela- 
tives, and with one hundred and fifty prisoners turned 
north to unite with the army at Der. Thus threat- 
ened, the chiefs of the Lahiru tribe pasturing south- 
east of this city submitted; and Ashurbanipal proudly 
recorded the fact, fully elaborated, in his royal in- 
scriptions. Elamite prisoners, subsequently captured, 
were able to report that a son of xAmedirra, Huban- 
nugash, had induced the district between the Hudhud 
River and the city Haiadanu to join him in a revolt 
against Huban-haltash, who had marshaled his forces 
on the bank of the river. A battle was imminent.^^ 

The position of Huban-haltash was exceedingly 
precarious, but he concentrated what troops could be 

^*7 Harper, ABLy No. 280 (Waterman, RCAEy I, 190 ff.). This letter 
is obviously one of the sources from which the composer of the Rassam 
Cylinder drew his account of the beginning of the seventh campaign in 
coL iv, ii. ii 6”23; cf. Streck, Assurbanipaly pp. 42 fF.; LARy VoL 11 , § 800. 



THE ECLIPSE OF ELAM 


1%^ 

spared opposite Der in Bit Imbi, long since devastat- 
ed by Sennacherib but now restored.-'^ This was a 
wise movcj for the Assyrians had decided to effect an 
entry into northern Elam. The invaders reached Bit 
Imbi and captured alive its commandant, Inibappi, 
son-in-law of the Elamite king. In his prism Ashur- 
banipal declared that Hubaii-haltash fled Madaktu 
for the mountains as a result of this victory, though 
Bel-ibni, wEo had simultaneously entered the south- 
ern part of the country, reported that internal revolt 
had brought about the Elamite's flight. Bel-ibni add- 
ed that he had demanded the surrender of Nabu-bei- 
shumate from two Elamite leaders, Umhiiluma Shd* 
Undadu.-^'"’ 

Over a part of Elam centering around Bubiiu,^’^''’ not 
far from Susa, a rival king, Huban-habua, maintained 
himself for a moment after Huban-haltash turned 
fugitive. Then he, too, realized that the Assyrians 
who had entered from the north were sweeping the 
banks of the Karkhah River, and he fled from the 
scene. Madaktu fell before the invaders, and Bel-ibni, 
now transferfed to the north, ordered all its treasures 
forwarded to Nineveh, though he urged that unless 
food were brought from Assyria the thousand prison- 
ers he had taken would starve.^^ These same prisoners 

Harper, JBL^ No. pSi (\\a.termzn, RCJE^ II, 46 ft.}. 

49 Harper, JBL, No. 462 (Waterman, RCJE^ I, 320 if.l. 

Bupila of the Persian documents from Susa in Mem.., Vol. IX. 

Harper, JBL^ No. 794 (Waterman, RCJE, 11 , 56 ff.j. 



200 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


formed the subject matter of another letter in which 
Bel-ibni confessed his desire to withdraw from active 
command of the army. He has had word from Huban- 
shibar that the Elamite nobles have had a change of 
heart and are now willing to surrender Nabu-bel-shu- 
mate; their messengers have reached him in Madak- 
tu, protesting against the devastation of all Elam for 
the sake of a single Chaldean. 

Nothing came of this projected settlement; and 
from Madaktu^ on sealed orders from Ashurbanipal/^ 
Bel-ibni continued down the valley of the Karkhah. 
The list of conquered cities which found its way into 
"’the'royal inscriptions includes all the most important 
sites in Elam which were reduced on this expedition 
by both bodies of invaders.^^ Most prominent are 
those in the land Rashi: Hamanu^ Bit Imbi, Bube, 
Bit Bunakki^ and Bit Arrabi. A second group com- 
prises those in the valley of the Karkhah: Madaktu; 
Dur Undasi; Tuba and Tell Tuba, where the fateful 
battle with Tepti-Huban-Inshushinak had occurred; 
Din Sharri^ where the god Ria had been worshiped in 
the days of Huteludush-Inshushinak; 'knd Susa. A 
third group includes the cities inhabited by Aramean 
tribes: Haiausi/^ Gatudu, Daeba, and others. 

Harper, ABL^ No. 792 (Waterman, RCAE^ II, 54 f.). 

S 3 Harper, ABL^ No. 285 (Waterman, RCAEy I, 198 f.). 

Streck, Assurbanipal^ pp. 46 f.; LAR^ Vol. 11 , § 804. 

ss So read, instead of Haialilsi, on the prisms in the British Museum 
by A. C. Piepkorn. 



THE ECLIPSE OF ELAM 


201 


One of those ceremonies which so rejoiced the heart 
of Ashurbanipal took place at Susa. There Tammari- 
tu^ son of Hiiban-nugashj, was once more enthroned 
king of a part of Eiam;^^' and to him, as from one sov- 
ereign to another, the absent king of Assyria inscribed 
a reminder of his own good treatment in the past and 
a promise of better things in the future, provided 
Tammaritu remained faithful, did not take the part 
of Nabu-bel-shumate, and abstained from alliance 
with Hubaii-haltash.'"" 

The king of Assyria also had word for the inhabit- 
ants of Rashi. They are to recall how he sent food to 
Elam when there was famine in the land under TCr- 
taki, and to act accordingly. Let them now obey the 
commands of their new sovereign, Tammaritu Be- 
cause this advice would sound ill in the ears of a peo- 
ple whose capital city, Bit Imbi, had only recently 
been ravaged, Ashurbanipal returned to power its 
commander, Imbappi. Couched in all the formalities 
of diplomatic language, the Assyrian's words on this 
occasion lost none of their effectiveness: Let the peo- 
ple of Rashi Remember the fate of Huban-haltash and 
obey Tammaritu, or take the consequences.®^ 

Installed in his homeland where he could obtain 
white Nisaean horses witii little difficulty, Tammaritu 

5 ^ Stxeck, Assurbanipaij pp. 44 f.; LJRy Vol. II, § 802. 

5 " Harper, ABLy No. 1022 AYaterman, RCAEy il, 212 ff.t. 

5 ^ Harper, ABLy No. 295 (Waterman, RCAEy I, 204 fF.). 

55 Harper, x 4 BLy No. 1260 (Waterman, RCAE, II, 376 f-). 



202 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


remembered the foreign goddess who had comforted 
him in a strange land and sent three of the animals 
to Ishtar of Uruk. From that city, after some hesita- 
tion, they were forwarded to Ashurbanipal in Nine- 
veh, where the dedication inscribed on their harness 
could be read: “From the king of Elam, Tammaritu, 
to Ishtar of Uruk.”*’" 

Huban-haltash seized this moment to return from 
the central fastnesses, and the Assyrian nominee 
hastily sought refuge in Assyria. This setback was 
discreetly misinterpreted in the royal inscriptions; 
but Bel-ibni knew that Huban-haltash in Madaktu 
wa?, again to no avail, urging upon his subjects the 
necessity of surrendering Nabu-bel-shumate.®' Since 
his advice went unheeded, the depredations of Elam- 
ites and Arameans continued. By this time the pa- 
tience of Assyria was completely exhausted, and the 
stage was set for a final coup which once and for all 
should put an end to an independent Elamite king- 
dom. It was the turn of fate that the last successful 
undertaking of a decaying Assyria should be carried 
to completion against the land which, fr&m the dawn 
of history, had been hostile to the Babylonian low- 
land. 

Bel-ibni, who again led the invaders, first descend- 

Harper, ABL^ Nos. 268 and 831 (Waterman, RCAE^ I, 180 ff., and 
II,78Q. 

Harper, ABL^ No. 281 obv. 23-31 (Waterman, RCAEy 1,192 f.). 
For the prism account cf. Streck, Assurhanifal^ pp. 44-47; LAR^ VoL 11 , 
§§ 802 f. 



THE ECLIPSE OF ELAM 


ed upon Rashi in the north, where Imbappl had 
proved no more loyal than many another. Bit Jiiibi 
and Hamaiiu were successfully entered and utterly 
destroyed. Huban-haitash deserted Madaktii and 
crossed the Ulai with his mother, wife, and faniiiy to 
the city Talah. Two of his officials who had separate- 
ly been in communication with Bel-ibni, Huban- 
shibar and Lhidadu, set out for the region of Hidaiii 
intent on the gathering of allies.^'" In the prism in- 
scription Ashurbanipal himself conducts the cam- 
paign, secures Bit Inibi, and forces the retreat of the 
Elamite to Diir Lhidasi and across the Idide.^^*^ it is 
not difficult to surmise whom we are to believe, the* 
commander of the army in the field or the king in 
Nineveh. 

Following the capture of Bit Imbi, the invaders 
ravaged the entire land of Rashi. Bit Bunakki, Har- 
tabanu, and Tuba all fell into their hands, and they 
again proceeded down the Karkhah valley. Aladaktu 
and Haltemash were secured, and the unguarded Susa 
and its neighboring cities Din Sharri, Sumuntunash, 
Pidilma, Bubilu, and Kabinak were entered. Now the 
campaign assumed more ambitious proportions. Hu- 
ban-haltash, resigned to the life of a fugitive, gave up 
his position on the Idide River and withdrew to Hi- 
dalu. Thither Bel-ibni followed, for he knew that the 
land was already rebelling against its sovereign. 

Harper, ABL, No. 2.S1 obv. 4-15 (Waterman, RCAE, I, 192 f.). 

Streck, Assurhanipal^ pp. 46 ff.; LAR^ VoL 11 , § 805. 



HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


lunu and a district of the city Bashimu fell prey 
:he Assyrian^ who was now at the very gateway to 
; land Parsumash^ over two hundred and fifty miles 
me hundred and twenty hours' march in rnoun- 
nous country — from Der; and there the pursuit of 
j Elamite ceased.^-^ 

The campaign had not been without results^ in- 
ding some of a totally unexpected nature. The 
.er of Parsumash, now a son of Teispes^ Kurash or 
Tus ly met the Assyrians near Hidalu^ made con- 
jsion of his impotence before a power greater than 
nself, and as a proof of his kingly subservience of- 
*ed his oldest son, Arukku, as hostage to x^ssyria. 
le king of another near-by city-state, Pizlume of 
udimiri, likewise sent his gifts to the ruler of As- 

ria.^s 

Meanwhile southern Elam had risen in rebellion 
;ainst its fugitive sovereign. The Arameans of the 
ahhasharua and Shallukea tribes accused him of 
urdering Umhuluma, once in correspondence with 
ei-ibni, and of attempting to starve them into strict 
3edience. Now they, too, had tired of <he actions of 
abu-bel-shumate, and Bel-ibni declared it extreme- 
" likely that Pluban-haltash would surrender the 

The account of the campaign as here given is a composite of Streck, 
ssurhanipal^ pp. 46 ff. (LAR, VoL II, §§ 806-8), and the fragmentary 
xt in Harper, ABL^ No. 1311 (Waterman, RCAE, II, 412 ff.); cf. also 
. C. Thompson, The Prisms of Esarhaddon and Ashurbanipal^ pp. 34 f. 

^sWeidner in AOFy VII (1931/32), 1-7; R, C. Thompson in JRASy 
932, p. 239, and in Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology (Uni- 
ersity of Liverpool), XX (1933), 86 and 95. On Hudimiri c£ J. Schawe 
iJOFy^m (1932/33), 52 f. 



THE ECLIPSE OF ELAM 


hated desperado provided a sealed order — doubtless 
including an absolute pardon for the Elamite king — 
were sent by Ashiirbanipal.^^' 

While awaiting this order, the Assyrian was not in- 
active. Returning to Susa, he opened the city to his 
plundering warriors, and Ashurbanipal delighted to 
tell of the treasures they obtained. Silver, gold, and 
priceless objects accumulated by Elamite kings from 
Sumer and Akkad in times long past, precious stones, 
clothing and weapons, valuable furniture on which 
the kings of Elam had eaten and drunk, slept and 
been anointed, chariots, horses and mules %vith trap- 
pings of silver — all these and more fell into tkeir 
greedy hands. 

The great temple of Inshushinak, built of glazed 
brick with towers of shining bronze, w^as torn down, 
and Inshushinak wended his w'ay to the plains of 
Babylonia for the first time in history. Other gods 
also whom the Elamites had revered in this degener- 
ate age were gathered from their shrines. Those par- 
ticularly noted as the gods whom the Elamite kings 
worshiped w^ere Shumudu (the Assyrian transcription 
of the divine name knowm to us as Shimut), Lagamar, 
Partikira, Amman-kasibar (in wEom some would rec- 
ognize Huban), Uduran (Hutran), and Sapak (per- 
haps the Kassite deity Shipak). Others were Ragiba, 
Sungursara,^' Karsa and Kirsamas (one of whom may 

Harper, JBL, No. 2S1 obv. 31 fF. (Waterman, RCJE, f, 192 it.). 

Perhaps ‘‘great king” in Elamite; cf. the city name Shuhari Sungur 
in Harper, No. 281 obv. 13 (Waterman, RCJE^ I, 192 f.). 



2o6 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


be Kiririsha)^ Shudanu, Aiapaksina^ Belala, Panin- 
timri (Pinikir)^ Napirtu {napivy Kindakarbu^ 

Silagara^ and Napsa.^® All these henceforth were to 
receive worship in the land of Assyria, to which they 
with their property, vessels, and priests were trans- 
ported. They were splendid trophies of conquest, but 
one other deity demanded and received far greater 
homage — ^Nana of Uruk. The statue of this goddess, 
which Kutir-Nahhunte had wrested from her dwell- 
ing over half a millennium before, now returned to 
the lowlands with great ceremony. It mattered little 
to Ashurbanipal that he added a round thousand 
yeaprs to her captivity 

From the temple sanctuaries of Susa, Madaktu, 
and Huradi thirty-two gold, silver, bronze, and lime- 
stone statues of Elam's former sovereigns were car- 
ried out to be mutilated. Those of the first neo-Elam- 
ite ruler, Huban-nugash, son of Huban-tahrah, of his 
successors Shutruk-Nahhunte II and Hallushu, and, 
curiously enough, of Tammaritu, now residing in 
Nineveh, were transported to Assyria. Bel-ibni 
gathered together the colossi which guayded the tem- 
ples, removed the fierce wild oxen which adorned 
their gates, and vowed them to destruction. His sol- 
diers trod the paths of secret groves into which no 
stranger had ever been permitted to enter, and set 

Cf. P. Jensen, “Elamitische Eigennamen,*’ VI (1892), 
47-70; De Genouillac, “Les dieux de rElam/' J^T, XXVII (1905), 94-119; 
Hiising in OZZ, VIII (1905), 385 ff.; C. Frank, “Elamische Gotter/’ Zj^, 
XXVIII (1914), 323-29. 

See above, p. iii. 



THE ECLIPSE OF ELAM 


them on fire. Tombs of the former kings were vio- 
lated; their offerings ceased. 

For twentv-iive days Assyrian troops marched over 
Elam scattering salt on the ruined fortresses. The 
royal families^ in particular the females of the lines 
through whom royalty descended, were transported 
to Assyria along with the prefects and mayors of the 
conquered cities, while hundreds of captive warriors 
with their superior officers — bowmen, horsemen, 
charioteers, and footmen — were deported. Wild asses, 
gazelles, and all kinds of beasts, declared Ashurbani- 
pal, henceforth should occupy the ruins; the phrase- 
ology reminds us of prophecies soon to be uttered by 
Hebrew captives in Babylon. Further, according to a 
writer in the Old Testament, Elamites, Susians, and 
men of the Tahha tribe of Arameans were colonized in 
Samaria. To a people conscious of a splendid past 
there could be no greater sign of degradation and de- 
cay. 

So much for the Assyrian royal annals. The hun- 
dreds of splintered monuments found by the excava- 
tors at Susa ^and the disordered condition of the 
mound tell much the same story."' There is no reason 
to doubt the Assyrian claim that a wealth of plunder 
w'as secured from the temple precinct of Inshushinak, 
but an enumeration of the objects they left behind is 
not without its own particular interest. 

The neo-Elamite kings had continued to employ 

Ezra 4:9. Cf. De Morgan, Afem., I, 96 It. 

De Mecquenem, Mim,, VII, 61-130; De Morgan, VII, 49-59. 



ao8 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


the foundation deposits and temple paraphernalia of 
their predecessors, such as inscribed gold leaves to- 
gether with seals and statuettes of Shulgi of Ur. In 
addition to these, as their own gifts to the deity, they 
had vowed gold, silver, and lead pendants, threads, 
disks, and bracelets. Nor were these all. Serpent 
heads of lead, of gold-plated silver, and of bronze sug- 
gest that the snake-goddess had not ceased to hold 
the reverence of the Elamite worshiper. Bronze 
statuettes of shaven men and high-coiffured women 
in ankle-length robes were numerous. Large bronze 
stamp seals, bracelets, birds, votive hatchets, chisels, 
arid pins all sound curiously out of place for deposit 
in a temple, as do hundreds of stamp and cylinder 
seals from every period of history; but the medallions 
and pendants of bronze are like those of gold and 
silver, and the bronze leaves are identical with those 
of more precious metals bearing dedicatory inscrip- 
tions of former sovereigns. Ivory blocks, statuettes, 
disks, and plaques were perhaps more in keeping with 
religious usage. Such objects in ivory and an ape exe- 
cuted in lapis lazuli point toward undisturbed com- 
merce with India and interior Iran, while numerous 
articles manufactured from shell speak of trade with 
or control of a shore of the Persian Gulf. Glazed 
bricks, plaques, and bas-reliefs best display the con- 
temporary craftsman’s skill. 

The havoc wrought by the warriors of Ashurbani- 

73 Cf. Toscanne, ‘‘Etudes sur le serpent,” MSm,, XII, 153-227. 



THE ECLIPSE OF ELAM 


2C9 


pal prevents us from picturing, even ciirsorilv, the 
buildings and temples which the later Elamites had 
adorned, though there is no reason to assume that 
they differed radically in appearance from those of the 
great Shilhak-Iiishushinak. Now all were torn down, 
the temples wrecked, their contents plundered. 

In one of his letters Bel-ibni speaks of the booty ob- 
tained from Susa, of Nana's triumphal journey to 
Uruk, and of Marduk-shar-usur's establishment as 
temporary governor of Susa. He further reports that 
officers have successfully been introduced into Bit 
Bunakki in the land of Rashi to the north, and among 
the Hilmu and Pillatu to the south.*" 

This was all very well from the standpoint of As- 
syrian administration, but few people had forgotten 
that Huban-haitash was still the nominal king of the 
land. Aware of his own weakness, Hubaii-haltash re- 
turned to the ruined Madaktu in a thoroughly chas- 
tened mood and communicated to Bel-ibni his desire 
to surrender Nabu-bei-shumate, now under guard. 
The Assyrian general ’was uncertain how to act and 
suggested that he correspond directly with Ashur- 
banipal. To this Huban-haitash agreed; and nothing 
could more clearly indicate his subservience than his 
Assyrian method of dating the letter, inscribed on the 
twenty-sixth day of the month Tammuz, in the epo- 
nym of Nabu-shar-aheshu. He declares his wiliing- 

7 *^ Harper, JBL, No. 1007 (Watennan, RCJE, 11 , 19S E). 

Harper, JBLy No. 12S6 (Waterman, RCJE^ II, 396 f.). 



aio 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


ness to hand over the Chaldaean and suggests a com- 
bined attack of xAssyria and Elam upon the Martenai, 
who had broken into the city Lahiru.’® 

So graciously was this message received by Ashur- 
banipal that it was wonderingly declared among the 
Arameans, “The kings are at peace with each 
other.”’^ Then x^ssyrian messengers advanced into 
Elam to secure Nabu-bel-shumate; but they were, 
after all, defeated in their purpose, for the Chaldaean 
in desperation committed suicide. The body could 
still be mutilated, and Bel-ibni preserved it in salt 
and forwarded it to Assyria with the news that the 
Elamite cities, Susa included, were completely under 
control.’® In this he was slightly optimistic, for Rashi 
and its cities revolted from Pa^e, their Aramean ruler 
established by Ashurbanipal.’’ By force of arms Bit 
Imbi, Hamanu, Aranziashu, and the neighboring 
towns were again brought into subjection, and their 
warriors were compelled to join the military establish- 
ment of Assyria. Hereafter a large portion of Elam 
was a province of the Assyrian empire. 

Some time later the Assyrian scribes were just put- 
ting the finishing touches to the great Rassam Cylin- 
der when internal troubles again drove Huban-hal- 

Harper, ABL^ No. 879 (Waterman, RCAE, II, no f.). 

77 Harper, ABLy No. 1115 (Waterman, RCAE, II, 276 fF.). 

7^ Harper, ABL^ No. 1 284 (Waterman, RCAE, II, 390 f.) ; Streck, 
Assurbanipal^ pp. 60 f.; LAR^ Vol. 11 , § 815. 

79 Streck, Assurhanipal^ pp. 62 f.; LAR^ Vol. II, § 816. 



THE ECLIPSE OF ELAM 


tash from his diminished kingdom. From the city 
Marubishti in Eilipi partisans of Ashurbanipal 
brought him to Nineveh^ where he joined other cap- 
tive Elamites in the harness of the Assyrian’s char- 
iot.®® Theii^ with the completion of this cylinder in- 
scription, about 636 B.c., our sources cease to give 
continuous history. In fragmentary lists are named 
a mayor of the city Susanu, perhaps Susa, with the 
good Assyrian name Mannua-ki-Ashur; a governor 
of the Elamites, Piidiu; and another official of Ekm.'^^ 
They make it probable that Elam, or at least Susa, 
remained a province of Assyria; but thereafter our 
sources are silent until the neo-Babylonian periods 

Streck, Js:i!irh;nipaly pp. 82 f. and f.; LJR^ VoL II, ?§ 832 f. 

Assyrian Deeds and Doeumenis^ VoL li (Cambridge, 1901?, 
Nos. 904 i 4 f. and 857 iii 1 1 and 20: cf. Forrcr, Die Pryjinzeinseilung des 
assyrischen Reiches^ p. 102. 



CHAPTER XII 

MEDES AND PERSIANS 

W HILE the Scythians were overrunning the 
kingdom which Khshathrita of Kar Kash- 
shi had built up between 675 and 653 b.c.^ 
the king of Parsumash, Chishpish or Teispes {ca, 
675-640)^ was enjoying a well-earned respite from in- 
tervention. Already in control of the Elamite Anzan 
"and unharmed by the Scythian depradations within 
Media, he now moved down the valleys of the moun- 
tains to the district made famous by two of his de- 
scendants, Cyrus the Great, who built Pasargadae, 
and Darius, who erected the palace platform at Per- 
sepolis. At his death he was, therefore, master of two 
distinct regions: his original Parsumash, supplement- 
ed by Anzan, and the newly acquired Parsa, or Per- 
sian land. Nothing could be more natural than that 
his empire should be so divided between^is two sons. 
Ariaramna or Ariaramnes (ca. 640-615), as the first 
son to be born after he had attained independent 
status, became ‘‘great king, king of kings, king of the 
land Parsa.” Kurash or Cyrus I {ca. 640-600), though 
the elder son, became the subordinate who governed 
the old homeland as the “great king.” 

For a time the affairs of Ariaramnes prospered. On 


212 



MEDES AND PERSIANS 


21;, 

a silver tablet he boasted that the great god Auramaz- 
da had given him the land Parsa, which possessed 
good horses and virile men, and that his father Teis- 
pes before him had been king/ His brother in Par- 
sumash almost immediately after his accession had 
encountered difficulties. To him the invasion of Elam 
by Assyria was an unparalleled achievement, which 
merited some recognition. His oldest son, Arukku, 
was tendered as a hostage and carried off to Xineveh, 
where his presence would assure Ashurbanipai that 
Parsiimash had no designs on Elam/ For several 
years thereafter our knowledge of affairs in Parsu- 
mash as in Parsa is obscured. 

By 625 B.c. the son of Khshathrita, Uvakhshatra or 
Cyaxares, again brought order to the Median high- 
lands. The manner in which he accomplished this 
feat is unknown. In Herodotus we read that he suc- 
ceeded in making ail the Scythian chieftains drunk, 
whereupon he killed themp but his return to power 
doubtless entailed greater hardship than this. We 
must likewise profess ignorance concerning most of 
his subsequent conquests. Past experience had, how- 


^ Herzfeld in JMI, If (1930/ 1 13-27. Doubts concerning the authen- 
ticity of this tablet are expressed by H. H. Schaeder in Sitztingsherickie der 
Pretissischen Akadifnie der irissenscknjien, phil.-hist. Klasse, 193W PP- 
635-45, and by W. Brandenstein in XXXIX (1932*3 i5-*9, but 

are successfully refuted by Herzfeld in. IV (1932;, 125-39, and by 

E. Benveniste in ]\!ci!let, Grammaire da t-kux-Perse (2d ed.; Paris, 1931}, 
PP- 1 

= See above, p. 204, 


5 Herodotus i. 106. 



214 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


ever, taught him that an organized army was pre- 
requisite to success; with the help of subject Scyth- 
ians his people were taught the use of the bow, and 
the army was separated into three classes of mobile 
troops: spearmen, bowmen, and cavalry.-* Thus 
equipped, it was probably Cyaxares who brought to 
an end in Parsa the reign of the “king of kings,” 
Ariaramnes, and so prevented that sovereign’s son 
and grandson, Arshama or Arsames and Vishtaspa or 
Hystaspes, from assuming even the title “king.” The 
silver tablet on which Ariaramnes had so proudly 
boasted his descent was itself carried to Ecbatana. 
"Cyaxares, unhindered by Assyria, probably obtained 
much of the territory south and west of Lake Urmia 
also. Presumably the former Assyrian province Par- 
sua became his at this time and the Manneans owned 
him as king, although many of their number fled for 
safety to Sin-shar-ishkun in Nineveh. With his cap- 
ture of the Harhar province in the old Lullubi terri- 
tory the way was opened by 6i 5 to an attack upon As- 
syria proper. 

Meanwhile a threat to the Assyrian eihpire had ap- 
peared in Babylonia. Nabopolassar, like Bel-ibni be- 
fore him, had begun his career as Assyrian adminis- 
trator of the Sealands. From this position he graduat- 
ed to independent kingship. As king of the Sealands 
he carried documents dealing with the temple cults of 
Uruk to Susa, the control of which he had inherited 

4 Herodotus i. 103, also i. 73. 



MEDES AND PERSIANS 


from Bel-ibni.'" By 616 ail Babylonia was under his 
control, and he himself attacked Assyria.' Mis inva- 
sion was met at Qablinu by Sin-shar-ishkun and Man- 
nean fugitives. Only the arrival of an Egyptian army 
to the support of Assyria occasioned his retreat south- 
ward, for he had proved himself more than a match 
for his northern enemies. By March of 615 he had 
tried the line of the Tigris and secured the cit}' of Ma- 
danu in the Arrapha province; in June he assaulted 
the city of Ashiir, but again an Assyrian army forced 
his retreat. 

At this point, though hardly as an ally of Nabopo- 
lassar, Cyaxares appeared on the scene, and in Ko- 
vember of 615 assaulted a city in the Arrapha prov- 
ince. By August of the next year he had descended 
the Tigris, doubtless after a conquest of the regions 
north of Assyria, and surrounded Nineveh. Unable 
to force its walls, he was content with the capture of 
Tarbisu and then descended the river to Ashur, wTich 
he stormed and captured. Nabopolassar, having no 
desire to see the empire of Assyria the possession of 
an Iranian rival/ reached the city shortly after its 

s Cf. Thureau-Dangin in XI (1914)^ 141 f. 

^ For the subsequent conflicts see the tablet published by C. j. Gadd, 
The Fall of Nineveh (London, 19231; translation only, by the late D. D. 
Luckenbii! in LAR, Vol. li, §§ii67ff. P'or the history cf. Oimstead, 
History of Assyria, pp. 634-38. For the historical interpretation of this 
period expressed by ]. Lewy in MFAG, XXIX, Heft 2 (1924}, 1-14, and 
also by Konig in his Atesie Gesckichte^ pp. 40-52, see the successful refuta- 
tion of the former study by P. Schnabel in ZA, XXXVI (1925), 316-18. 

7 Cf. the sreed of Belesvs in the storv of Ctesias in Diodorus Siculus 
ii. 28. 



ai6 HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 

seizure. In the presence of two formidable armies the 
sovereigns came to terms; good will and alliance were 
contracted between them,® and Amytis, infant daugh- 
ter of Astyages, Cyaxares’ son, was betrothed to 
Nabopolassar’s young son, Nebuchadnezzar.^’ Hence- 
forth the two forces were to act as one. 

Throughout 613 the Median troops were occupied 
elsewhere. It is at this point in his narrative that 
Herodotus injects the twenty-eight-year domination 
by Scythians; this may be merely a chronological dis- 
placement of the event or may imply still more, since 
Cyaxares on his return to the lowlands is called king 
of the Umman-Manda, “hosts of the Manda.” It may 
suggest that during 613 the Mede obtained control 
over many of the Scythian wanderers in the moun- 
tain lands north of Assyria. 

However that may be, by 61 a both Cyaxares and 
Nabopolassar were ready to attack Nineveh. The 
three battles they fought between June and August 
are recorded in the chronicle and correspond with 
three defeats suffered by “Arbaces the Mede” and 
“Belesys the Babylonian” described by Ctesias,” but 

® Gadd, op, cit.^ pp. 33 and 38; cf. LAR,, Vol. II, § 1174. 

^ Berossus, frag. 43 (cf. P. Schnabel, Berossos [Berlin, 1923], p. 270), 
from Polyhistor, in Eusebius Chron. i. 5. 3 (ed. Schoene, pp. 29 f.); 
Berossus, frag. 44 (cf. Schnabel, op, cit,, pp. 270 f.), from Abydenus, in 
Eusebius Chron, i. 9. 2 (ed, Schoene, pp. 37 f.). Ctesias Persica^ exc. 2 
(ed. Miiller, p. 45), also witnesses to the fact that Astyages had a daughter 
named Amytis. 

In Diodorus Siculus iL 25 f. 



MEDES AXD PERSIANS 


21 - 


a final assault in August was completely successfiil. 
Late in September Cyaxares returned to Media with 
his share of the spoil, but the end of his participation 
in Babylonian affairs had not yet come. A new king- 
dom of Assyria had been established in northern 
3^Iesopotamia^ and Nabopoiassar early in 6 ig ap- 
pealed to the iVlede for assistance. By November of 
that year Cyaxares and his troops reached Bab}'Ionia, 
where they joined forces with Nabopoiassar; the sub- 
sequent march of these allies to Harran was of suffi- 
cient importance to merit the attention of the Baby- 
lonian crown prince, Nebuchadnezzar,'^ The mere 
recollection of the destruction wrought in Harran by 
Cyaxares and his Medes was enough to bring fear and 
respect for Iranians into the heart of a Babylonian 
ruler fifty years later,” After a few more years of war- 
fare and uncertainty the city itself remained in the 
possession of the Mede. 

Once again, after the conquests just enumerated, 
Median history fades into obscurity and inference 
must be our guide. The original kingdom of Cyaxares 
may be safelv delimited as including the modern citv 

w w- o * 


Letter in Contenao, Coyitrats et Uttres ♦'Musce du Louvre, Departe- 
ment des antiquites orientales, ‘"Textes cuneiformes/' VoL IX), Xo. 99; 
cf. Tliureau-Dangin In RA^ XXII {1925k 27-29. This letter, containing 
the statement *‘the king has gone to Harran; a large force of the Medes 
(Madai) went with him,’* should alone refute the view of Gadd that 
Cyaxares and his Umman-Manda were Scythians. 

” Cf. in Langdon, Die neiihahyloyiischen Konignyii^cknjtcn^ ‘‘Xabonid” 
texts N’o. I i 8 ff., Xo. 8 ii i ff. and x 12 ff. 



2i8 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Rayy south of Teheran in the east, Isfahan in the 
south, and the district of Atropatene, modern Azer- 
baijan, in the northwest, with his capital at Ecbatana, 
modern Hamadan."^ Already, it would seem, he had 
incorporated the land Parsa within his state, and now 
Parsumash acknowledged his power. The administra- 
tion of both these lands was granted to Kanbujiya or 
Cambyses I {ca. 600-559), who had followed Cyrus I 
on the throne as “king of the city Anshan.” 

Much of Iran was, therefore, subservient to Cya- 
xares, although the Cadusians, living in the narrow 
hot^ region between the Elburz Range and the shores 
of the Caspian Sea, denied to him their land.^'* 
Ctesias alone is authority for the statement that the 
Parthians revolted from the Medes in the reign of 
Astibaras, who in the Cnidian’s system was identical 
with Cyaxares. A treaty, concluded after numerous 
battles had been fought, provided that the rebels 
should be governed by the Medes, whose allies they 
were to be for all time.^® This account is not in itself 
improbable, and Parthia henceforth may have been 
subject to Media in such a way as outlying districts 
were later subservient to the Arsacid rulers.^® 

« Cf. Herzfeld, AMI, VII, 17 and 22 f. 

^4 The Median Artaeus of the Ctesias story (ed. Muller, p. 42 [from 
Diodorus ii. 33]) is to be equated with Cyaxares; see table above, p. 176. 
Cf. also Strabo Geogr. xi. 13. 3. 

Ctesias, ed. Muller, pp. 42 f. (from Diodorus ii. 34). 

^®Cf. Herzfeid in AMIy VII (1934), 29 f.; Neilson C. Debevoise, A 
FolUical History of Parthia (in preparation; to be published by the Ori- 
ental Institute in association with the University of Chicago Press). 



MEDES AXD PERSIANS 


Cyaxares' conquests to the northwest were even 
more extensive. There the territories which had once 
formed a part of the Haldian kingdom and !iow were 
in the possession of foreign invaders, the Armenians, 
became his; and Herodotus expressly declares that 
all Cappadocia to the Haiys River (modern Kizil Ir- 
mak) was subject to the Medes before the rise of the 
Persian empire/" By 590 b.c. Cyaxares had reached 
the Haiys, where he came into contact with Alyattes, 
the ruler of Lydia. Neither side gained the advantage 
during five years of the ensuing w'ar; but in the sixth 
year, 585, a solar eclipse was understood as an evil 
portent and an armistice declared. Arbitration ‘was 
resorted to, and Nabu-naid of Babylon, probably act- 
ing for Alyattes, agreed with Syennesis of Cilicia, the 
representative of Cyaxares, that the boundary be- 
tw^een Media and Lydia should henceforth be the 
Haiys River. To insure the perpetuity of the bound- 
ary thus defined, Aryenis, daughter of Alyattes, be- 
came the wife of Astyages, Cyaxares’ son. Within the 
year Astyages succeeded his father/^ 

Meanwhile Nebuchadnezzar (604-562) had suc- 
ceeded his father in Babylon. In addition to his ex- 
tensive holdings in North Syria, he also controlled 

Herodotus i. 72. 

Herodotus i. 73 ff.; for date of the eclipse see references in Pr&k, 
GescMchSt\ I, 164 L Herodotus i. loj expressly declares that the eclipse 
occurred in the reign of Cyaxares; Cicero De dhinadoneu 49 and Eusebi- 
us Ckrm. can, (ed. Schoene, 94 f.) date the conclusion or the war 
to the reign of Astyages; cf. also Pliny Hist, nat. ii. 12 (ed. Gronovius). In 
Babylonian the name Astyages is written Ishtumegu. 



220 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


the Sealands in the south and Susa in the east. Bricks 
stamped with his name were used to erect buildings in 
that city, while an alabaster vase with his inscription 
and a weight with his legend are further witnesses of 
his control.'^ A copy of one of his earliest inscriptions, 
mentioning the Puqudu tribe of Arameans, Der, La- 
hiru, and Arrapha, made its way to the eastern city.^“ 

The campaigns of Nebuchadnezzar in the west 
have received much comment because of their in- 
terest to students of biblical history. One Greek tra- 
dition declared that he sought assistance from Asti- 
baras or Cyaxares the Mede when he began the ex- 
pedition which included the capture of Jehoiachin of 
Jerusalem in 597;“ another related that he built the 
famed hanging gardens of Babylon to please his Me- 
dian-born queen, the daughter of Astyages.“ The fact 
that Babylon under Nebuchadnezzar became the 

^9 Bricks: Scheil in RAy XXIV (1927), 47 f., identical with those from 
Babylon in Langdon, Die neubabylonischen Kbnigsinschrifteny “Nebukad- 
nezar” texts Nos. 39”4i. Vase: Mim.y VI, 56, now in Langdon, op, cit,y 
“Nebukadnezar” No. 47. Weight: Mem., Vol, IV, PL 18 (cf. Scheil in 
Mem.y V, xxiii); cf. also De Mecquenem in RAy XXI (1924), 109, and 
MSm,y XXV, 207 f. 

Scheil, Mem.y II, 123 fF., a part of the text now complete in Langdon, 
o/)^a/.,pp. i44fF. C‘Nebukadnezar” No. 17). 

Polyhistor (frag. 24) in Eusebius, Evang, Praep. ix. 39; cf. E. H. 
Gifford, Eusebii Pamphili Emngelicae praeparationis libri XVy III, 
Part I (Oxford, 1903), 482. 

^ Berossus, frag. 2 (cf. Schnabel, BerossoSy pp. 271-73), from Josephus 
Contra Apionem i. 19, repeated in Antiq. x. 11. i; also in the Armenian 
version of Eusebius Chron. (ed. Schoene, pp. 47 f.) in Eusebius, Werke, 
V. Die Chronik (transL by J. Karst; Leipzig, 1911), pp. 22 f. 



MEDES AND PERSIANS 


221 


most strongly fortified city of the ancient Orient^^ is 
far more indicative of the political situation and of the 
Babylonians’ dread of their eastern neighbor. 

So long as Nebuchadnezzar lived, Mede and Baby- 
lonian were too evenly matched to make a trial by 
battle profitable; but after his death the internal con- 
dition of Babylonia gave Astyages an unhoped-for 
opportunity. Amel-Marduk (562-560) broke with 
the policy of his father, freed the captive Jewish king, 
Jehoiachin, and followed the leadership of the priestly 
party. The militarists supplanted him with Nergal- 
shar-usur, who after four years fell before the pro- 
priestly Labashi-Marduk. In 556 the latter in turn’ 
was assassinated by militarists, who placed Nabu- 
naid on the tottering throne.""" 

This political crisis was aggravated by the loss of 
Elam and Susa, which had continued to pay enforced 
allegiance to Babylon throughout the brief reigns of 
Amel-Marduk and Nergal-shar-usur but which no 
longer formed a part of the kingdom by the accession 
of Nabu-naid.^® Probably they became a part of the 
expanding empire of Astyages, while throughout 

Cf. Olmstead, “The Chaldaean Dynast7,’' Hebrew Union College 
Annualy II (1925), 42. 

^4 Cf. Olmstead in Hebrew Union College Annual^ II, 42 f., and History 
of Palestine and Syria (New York, 1931), pp. 539 f. 

So, if we are to judge from the archeological data. Vase of Amel- 
Marduk from Susa in Scheil, MSm,, X, 96, republished after restoration 
in Mem.^ XIV, 60; cf. Thureau-Dangin in RA, IX (1912), 24 f. Vase of 
Nergal-shar-usur in Scheil, Mim.^ X, 96. 



222 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Babylonia the belief grew that the hostile Medes 
would continue to advance and would hurl themselves 
upon the capital city. 

The prophet Ezekiel had constantly encouraged his 
companions to accept their fate and to dwell peace- 
ably with their new masters. Another Jew, embit- 
tered by the failure of the plan which had led to 
Jehoiachin’s liberation, and steeped in prophecies of 
Jeremiah which predicted the coming of a foe from 
the north against Palestine,^® saw in the threatened 
Median attack only the just vengeance of Yahweh 
upon proud Babylon. He declared that the powerful 
'Medes, so apprehensively regarded by his captors and 
now supplemented by troops of Urartians or Haldi- 
ans, Manneans, and Scythians, whom Cyaxares had 
conquered but a few years before, formed the instru- 
ment by which Yahweh would insure Babylon’s de- 
struction."'^ With keen delight he made much of the 
terror aroused in the heart of every Babylonian by 
the cruel and pitiless Medes, in whose hands the bow 
had become a most deadly battle weapon.^® He rec- 
ognized the internal weakness of Babylonia, where 
priestly and military parties in turn had set up four 
separate rulers in the short space of six years, and re- 
minded his hearers that there was violence in the 

Jer. chaps. 4 ff. 

=27 Isa, 13 : 17; Jer. 51:11 and 28; cf, the ‘‘Ararat, Minni, and Ashkenaz” 
of Jer. 51:27. 

28 Isa. 13:18; Jer. 50:14, 29, 42; 51:3 and ii. 



MEDES AND PERSIANS 223 

land, with ruler turning against ruler.^^ Nor was he 
unmindful of the ring of fortresses which surrounded 
Babylon/® though he announced that the Medes 
would crush them to pieces and annihilate in their 
descent the Aramean Puqudu and the inhabitants of 
the Sealands.^^ Finally, he declared, no Babylonian, 
nor even a Jewish captive in the land, could hope that 
the Medes would show mercy, for one and all would 
be massacred. Rejoicing in what appeared to be the 
city’s imminent destruction, time and again he re- 
turned to his refrain: 

Flee from the midst of Babylon, 

Go out from the land of the Chaldeans.^® 

Unfortunately for the hopes of our would-be proph- 
et, the threatened Median attack did not take place. 
Nabu-naid (556-538) made himself secure upon the 
throne, and the peril was past. Henceforth Astyages 
was too much occupied with his own affairs to con- 
template a conquest of the lowlands. 

In Parsumash, now equated with Anzan, Camby- 
ses I appears to have led a quiet existence. Nominally 
king in his own right, he was actually subordinate to 
the Medes, who had placed him over the land Parsa 
after the disappearance of Ariaramnes. His marriage 

2936^51:46. 30 Jej., p;i2, 31 f. 31 Jer. 50:21. 

32 jer. 50:8, 28; 51:6, 9, 45, 50; Isa. 13:14. On this interpretation of 
Isa., chapter 13, and Jer., chaps. 50 f., cf. the abstract of a paper read 
before the Middle West Branch of the American Oriental Society, JAOS, 
LI (1931), 370; cf. also Oimstead, History of Palestine and Syria^ pp. 
542-45. 



HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


224 

with Mandane, a daughter of Astyages, considerably 
raised his social status, which in Median eyes was not 
high. Of this union was born Cyrus the Great.^^ 
Promptly upon his accession in 559 Cyrus II began 
the erection in Parsa at the site known as Pasargadae 
of buildings which should mark him as being of the 
true blood royal. His legend, inscribed beneath the 
relief of his own personage, described him as “the 
great king, the Achaemenid,” a title which no less 
recognized his subservience to Astyages, the “king of 
kings.”^^ Cyrus was, however, determined to prove 
his right to the throne of the Mede. Proceeding to 
gather strength within his own land by demanding al- 
legiance from numerous Iranian tribes,^® he accepted 
at the same time an alliance with Babylon proffered 
by Nabu-naid. The Babylonian hoped thus to rid his 
empire of the danger from the Medes, who by their 
control of Harran could at any time threaten the line 
of communication between Babylonia and Syria; he 

33 Herodotus i. 107 f. This story is generally doubted, but the marriage 
of a daughter of a king to a vassal is a well-known phenomenon of oriental 
and Hellenistic history. There is no inherent reason for doubt. On the 
other hand, the “tendency” of Ctesias in denying Median blood in the 
founder of the Persian Empire (in Persica^ exc. 2 [ed. Muller, p. 45]) is 
perfectly obvious. Professor Olmstead draws my attention to the fact 
that, shortly after the appearance of Ctesias at the court, Media revolted 
in 410, at a time when the Persian empire was having trouble in Egypt 
also; cf. Xenophon Hellenica i. 2. 19. 

34Her2feld in AMI, I (1929-30), 14 fF. 

3 s Herodotus i. 125, Otanes and Gobryas, later conspirators with 
Darius, were two leaders of such tribes; cf. Praiek, Geschichte, I, 203 f. 



MEDES AND PERSIANS 


225 

himself began to collect troops from Gaza on the 
border of Egypt to the Sealands along the Persian 
Gulf. 

By 553 B.c. the plan of Cyrus was evident, and 
Astyages summoned him to court. Cyrus’ refusal to 
attend constituted active rebellion^^ and was perhaps 
the prearranged signal for Nabu-naid to proceed 
against Syria. Harran was wrested from the Median 
garrison in this year, to the great joy of the Babyloni- 
an sovereign but Astyages was not thus diverted 
and ordered an army sent against his disobedient 
subject. 

Concerning the subsequent warfare we have two 
variant reports by Greek historians and a dry narra- 
tive in a Babylonian chronicle. One Greek account, 
found in the writings of Nicolaus of Damascus, who 
derived his information from Ctesias, relates a story 
with a great deal of oriental coloring. The first battle, 
we read, lasted for two days and was a great victory 
for Astyages. Fought near the Medo-Persian frontier, 
the Persians.^ by whom we would understand the peo- 
ple of Parsa, fled to Pasargadae. A second battle, near 
this city, was also of two days’ duration; although the 
Medes gained the advantage on the first day, the 
Persians, urged on by their womenfolk, obtained a 

Herodotus i. 127. 

Inscriptions: Langdon, Die neubahylonischen Konigsinschriften^ 
“Nabonid” texts Nos. i, 8, and 9. 



226 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


mighty victory on the second.^® Astyages still re- 
mained on the offensive until a third battle^® resulted 
in another complete victory for Cyrus. Astyages then 
fled with a remnant of his army but was captured 
after a slight struggle. 

The second Greek account is by Herodotus, whose 
veracity we are seldom able to question. The Father 
of History knew of only two battles. In the first, at 
which Astyages was not present, his field commander 
Harpagus (from whose descendants Herodotus de- 
rived much information concerning early Media), 
together with a great part of the army, deserted to 
Cyrus. In a second battle the aged Astyages himself 
led the Medes and was taken prisoner. ““ 

The sober Babylonian chronicle agrees with this 
story of Herodotus.'’^ Astyages, we are told, collected 
his army and marched against Cyrus, the king of 
Anshan. The Median army revolted and handed its 
sovereign over to Cyrus, who at once proceeded to 
Ecbatana, the capital of the Median realm, and loot- 
ed its treasure. 

Thus ended the empire of the Medes, "and thus be- 
gan the sovereignty of the Persians. Elam, once great 

Nicolaus of Damascus in frag. 66; cf. F. Jacoby, Die Fragmenie 
der griechischen Historiker, II A (Berlin, 1926), 365-70. 

Strabo Geogr. xv. 3. 8. 

*!0 Herodotus i. 127 f. 

'‘^Sidney Smith, Babylonian Historical TextSy pp. iiofF. (col. ii, 

11 1-4). 



MEDES AND PERSIANS 227 

in its own right, became the third ranking satrapy, 
but its custom of matrilinear succession was a baneful 
influence at the court of the Achaemenian sovereigns. 
Media, once itself the center of a mighty realm, be- 
came the second ranking satrapy, though Medes were 
equally honored with Persians, and foreigners spoke 
of them as a unity, Medes and Persians. Parsa, 
thenceforth considered the heart of the empire, was 
the satrapy par excellence, from which had come the 
virile successors of the Iranian Achaemenes. With the 
appearance of these successors the Near East entered 
a new phase of history. 



TABLE I 


A WAN 

Babylonia 

Peli (ca. 2670 B.c.) 

Tata 

Ukku-tahesh 

Hishur 

Shushun-tarana 

Napi-ilhush 

Kikku-sime-temd 

LuhhUishshan^' 

S argon {ca. 2530 b.c,) 

Hishef-ratep 

Rimush 

Helu 

Manishtusu 

Hita 

Naram-Sin 

Puzur-Inshushinak 

Sharkalisharri 

Guti 

Guti 

SiMASH 

Ur Third Dynasty 

Girnamme 

Ur-Nammu (2290-2273) 

Tazitta I 

Shulgi (2272-2226) 

Ebarti I 

Bur-Sin (2225-2217) 

Tazitta 11 

Gimil-Sin (2216-2208) 

Enbiluhhan 

Ihi-Sin (2207-2183) 

Kindattu 

Idaddu I (Idadu-Inshushinak) 
Tan-Ruhuratir 

Ebarti 11 

Idaddu II 

Gungunum (2087-2061) 


* In Tables I~III italics indicate proven contemporaneity. 


228 



TABLE II 


SUKKALMAH 


Ebarti 

(ca. 2020-2001 B.C.) 
Shiihaha (Temti-Shil- 
hak) 

(ca. 2000-1986) 

Sliirakduh 

(ca. 1985-1966) 


Siwepalarhuppak 
(ca. 1965-1946) 
Kuduzulush I 
(ca. 1945-1918) 

Kutir-Nahhunte 
(ca. 1850-1841) 

Temti-agun 
(ca. 1840-1826) 
Kutir-Shilhaha 
(ca. 1825-1811) 

Kuk-Nashur I 
(ca. 1 8 10-1800) 
Temti-raptash 
(ca. I799-I79i> 
Kuduzulush 11 
(ca. 1790-1781) 
Tan-Uli 
(ca. 1780-1771) 
Temti-halki 
(ca. 1770-1761) 


Kuk-Kirwash 


Elam 

SUKKAL of 

Elam and Si- 
mash 


Shimkduh 


Shimut-wartash 

Siwepaiarhup- 

pak 

Kuduzulush I 

Kutir-Nah- 

hunte 

Tata (Atta- 
merra-halki) 

Temti-agun 

Kutir-Shilhaha 

Kuk-Nashur I 


Temti-raptash 

Kuduzulush II 

Tan-Uli 

Temti-halki 

Kuk-Nashur II 

Bala-ishshan 

Kuk-Kirwash 

Kuk-Nahhunte 

KaS SITES 


SUKKAL of 

Susa 


Shimut-wartash 


Siwepalarhup- 

pak 

Kuduzulush I 
Kutir-Nahhunte 


Addahushu 

Temti-agun 

Kutir-Shilhaha 
Kuk-Nashur I 

Shirtuh 

Temti-raptash 
Kuduzulush II 

Tan-Uli 

Temti-halki 

Kuk-Nashur II 


Kuk-Kirwash 
Tem-Sanit 
Kuk-Nahhunte 
Kuk-Nashur III 


229 


Babylonia 


Kudur-Mabuk 


Warad-Sin 

(1989-1978) 

Rim-Sin 

(1977-1917) 


Hammurabi 

(i947-i<)05> 


Ammhaduga 

(1801-1781) 


Kassites 
(1749 ff.) 



TABLE III 


Anzan and Susa 
Pahir-ishshan 
{ca. 1310 B.c.) 
Attar-kittah 
{ca. 1295-1286) 
Huban-numena 
{ca. 1285-1266) 
Untash-Huban 
{ca, 1265-1245) 
Unpatar-Huban 
{ca. 1244-1243) 
Kidin-Hutran 
{ca. 1242-1222) 


Halludush-Inshushinak 
{ca. 1221-1208) 
Shutruk-Nahhunte 
{ca. 1207-1171) 

Kutir-Nahhunte 
{ca. 1170-1166) 

Shilhak-Inshushinak 
{ca. 1 1 65-1 1 51) 
Huteludush-Inshushinak 
{ca. 1 1 50-1 1 40) 
Shilhina-hamru- 
Lagamar 


Babylonia 

Nazi-Mamttash 

(1319-1294) 


Kashtiliash III 
(1249-1242) 

EnliUnadin^shumi 

(1241-1240) 

Kadashman-Harbe 

Adad^shum-iddina 

(1238-1233) 

Zamama-shum-iddina 

(1174) 

Enlil-nadin-ahhe 

(1173-1171) 

Marduk-shapik-zeri 

(1170-H53) 

Nebuchadnezzar I 
(1146-1123) 
Enlil-nadin-apli 

Marduk-nadin-ahhe 

(1116-1101) 


Assyria 


Tukulii-Ninurta I 
(1255-1218) 


Ashur-dan I 
(1189-1154) 


Ashur-resh-ishi 

(1149-1117) 

Tiglathpileser I 
(1116-1090) 



Anzan and Susa 


TABLE IV 

Susa 


Huban-tahrah 


Huban-immena 

Shu truk-N ahhun te 
(717-699) 

Madaktu 


-dau. Huban-nugash 
(742-717) 


Haliushu-Inshushinak 

(699-693) 


Kudur-Nahhunte 
(693-692) 
Huban-immena 
I (692-688) 


Huban-haltash I 
(688-681) 


Shilhak-Inshushinak II 


Tepti-Huban-Inshushinak 
{ca, 663-653) 

Hutran-tepti 


Tammaritu Adda-hamiti-Inshushinak 
(651-649) j (653-648) 

Indabigash | 

(649-648) Huban-haltash III 

(648-636?) 


Huban-haltash II 
(681-675) 

Urtaki 

(675-663) 

Huban-nugash 


Huban-nugash Tammaritu 
(653-651) (in Hidalu, 

653) 


231 


Assyria 

Adad-nirari II (911-890 B.c.) 
Tukulti-Ninurta II (890-885) 
Ashurnasirpal (885-860) 
Shalmaneser III (860-825) 
Shamshi-Adad V (825-812) 
Adad-nirari III (812-782) 
Shalmaneser IV (782-772) 
Ashur-dan III (772-755) 
Ashur-nirari V (755-746) 


Tiglathpileser III (746-728) 
Shalmaneser V (728-722) 
Sargon (722-705) 

Sennacherib (705-681) 


Esarhaddon (681-668) 


Ashurbanipal (668-626) 


Ashur-etil-ilani (626-622) 
Sin-shar-ishkun (622-612) 
Ashur-uballi t (6 1 2-608) 



TABLE V 


Media 

Deioces 
(Daiaukku) 
(71^5 B.c.) 

Khshathrita 

(‘Thraortes”) 

(675-653) 


Parsumash 

Achaemenes 

(Hakhamanish) 

(700-675) 

Teispes 

(Chishpish) 

(675-640) 


Parsa 


Scythians 

{653-625) 


Astyages 

(Ishtumegu) 

(585-550) 


Cyrus I 
(Kurash) 
(640-600) 


Ariaramnes 

(Ariaramna) 

(640-615) 


[Arukku]’ 


L^yaxares 

(Uvakhshatra) 

(625-585) 


Cambyses I 
(Kanbujiya) 
over Parsumash 
and Parsa 
(600-559) 


[Arsames] 

(Arshama) 


[Hystaspes] 

(Vishtaspa) 


* Names inclosed in { 


Cyrus II 
(Kurash) 
over Media, 
Parsumash, 
and Parsa 

(559-529) 


Cambyses II 
(Kanbujiya) 

(529-521) 

Darius I 
(Daraya- 
vaush) 
(521-486) 

are those of heirs who did not reign. 

232 


Babylonia 


Nabopolassar 

(626-604) 

N ebuchadnezzar 
(604-562) 


Amel-Marduk 

(562-560) 

Nergal-shar-usur 

(560-556) 

Labashi-Marduk 

(556) . 

Nabu-naid 

(556-538) 







INDEX 


With proper names the following abbreviations are used: r., city 
name; divine name; /., land name;^., personal name. 


Abalgamash, p.y 30 
Ab-i-Diz (“Diz River”), 4, 165 
Abirattash, 94 
Abirus Mountain, 148 
Abydenus, 216 

Achaemenes (Hakhamanish), />., 
146,166,179,189, 227, 232 
Adad, d., 41, 90 f., 100 {., 120, 133, 

135 

Adad-nirari I, p., 98 
Adad-nirari II, /•., 142, 231 
Adad-nirari III,/>., 146, 231 
Adad-shum-iddina, 105, 230 
Adamdun, r., 52 f., 57 
adda (“father”), 71, 75, 77 f,, 81 

Adda-hamiti (Attametu), p., 

191 

Adda-hamiti-Inshushinak (Atta- 
metu), 195, 231 

Addahushu, p,, 70 f., 80, 229 
Afghanistan, i, 18 
Africa, 6, 1 5 
Agabtaha,^., 103 

Agade period: 

Elamite text from, 1 1 
history, 27-42 
“Luristan bronzes” of, 183 
Agum, />., 94 


Agum-kakrime, p., 92, 94 f. 
Ahsheri,/)., 170 f., 180 f. 

Aia, r., 106 
Aiahupshan, d., 37 
Aiapaksina, d., 206 
Aiapir, 159 f., 191 
A.ip(or e).a.sunkik, d., 100 f. 

Akarsailu, r., 98, 109, 118, 136; see 
also Ukarsillam 
Akkad, /., 40, 82, 109, in 

Akkadian culture at Susa, 102, 108, 
190 

Akkadian inscriptions: 

from Susa, 36, 38 f., 62-64, 81 f., 
86, 103, 108 

from elsewhere, 41, 45, 60, 65 

Akkadian language at Susa, 34, 
71 ff. 

Akkuddu, c., 163 

, . . .akmish Lanhu , /., 118 

Akuz, c.y 68 
Albright, W. F., 23, 27 
Allen, T. G., x 

al-lum-muma alu-u-muma; “for 
my city”), loi f. 

Aim an, see I aim an 
Alpines, 18 f. 


^33 



234 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Aitun Koprii, c., 33, 35, 47> 

1 1 8, 136; see also Shimurrum 
a,nd Zaban 
al-'-'Ubaid, c.^ 9 
Aiwand River, 1 80 

Alyattes, A-j ^^9 

Amal, d,, 35 

“Amarna” period, 95 

Amedirra, p., 198 

Ameka, jt>.5 143 

Amel-Marduk,_p.j 121, 232 

Amman-kasibar, d.y 205 

Ammizaduga, p., 84, 229 

Amorites, 68 f., j^;see also Amurru 

A mra phel D.. 80 

Amurru, /., 67, 77 

Amytisj p.^ 216 

Anatolia, /., 2, 19, 140, 170; see also 
Asia Minor 
Anau, r., 8 

Andirpattianu (Antarpati), r., 172 
Annahhutash, c., 117 
Anpima, r., see Sha Anpima 
Anshan (Anzan), L: 

Achaemenids in, 179 f., 212, 
218, 223, 226 

conquest of, 29, 31, 47-60, 65 
kings of Anshan and Susa, 70 f., 
81, 98, 130, 157 f., 164, 230 f. 
location of, 5, 31 f., 107, 120 
Neo-Elamite relations with, 
165 f., 179, 189 
pronunciation of, 12, 179 f, 

Antarpati (Andirpattianu), r., 172 
An turn, d.^ 41 
Anu, d.y 41, 66, 105 


Anubanini, y)., 40, 42, 182 
Anumutabil, p.^ 6 ^ f. 

Anu nit, d.y 43 
Anzan, /., see Anshan 
Apirak, r., see Apishal 
Apishal, r., 33 
Appi-sini-beti, r., 115 f. 

Arabia, 16 
Arameans; 

in Babylonia, Ii7f., 158, 166, 
194, 220, 223 

in Elam, 1 56, 1 59, 1 86, 1 91 , 1 96, 
200, 202, 204, 207, 210 
in Zagros Mountains, 147 
Aranziashu, r., 210 
Ararat (Urartians), 222 
Arashtua, />., 143 
Araziash, /., 146 f. 

Arbaces (Arbaku),^., 154, 176, 216 
Arbela (Erbil), e., 46 f., 97, 144, 
148 

Arbianes ( = “Phraortes”), />., 176 

Ariaramnes (Ariaramna), p., 32, 
212, 214, 223, 232 
Arik-den-ilu, ^.,97 
Arisen, p., 33 
Arlagan, p.y 46 
Arman, /., see lalman 
Armenia, 1,2, 14, 144 f, 
Armenians, 219 
Armenoids, 18 

Arrapha, /., 29, 43, 116, 118, 215, 
220 

Arri (Choara), 172 f. 

Arsacids, 218 



INDEX 


235 


Arsames (Arshama), _p.j 214, 232 
Artaeus ( = Cyaxares [the king]), 
176, 218 

xArtasari, T?., 144 
Artasiraru, 75.5 145 
Artaxerxes 176 

Artycas ( = Deioces)j 176 

Artynes ( = ‘Thraortes”)5 176 
Arakku,/>., 204, 213, 232 
Aryans, 20, 140 
Aryenis, 7?., 219 

Arzuhina (Aitun Koprii), 136 
Asaniu Mountain, 117 
Asharid, />., 30 
Ashgupe, r., 73 
Ashkenaz, see Scythians 
Ashpabarra, p., 154; see also Ish- 
pabara 
Ashur: 

city of, 118, 215 
land of, see Assyria 
Ashurbanipal, pr. 

inscriptions of, 59, iii, 123- 

45. 133. 158, 163 

reign of, 181-213, 231 
Ashur-dan L, 108, 119, 230 
Ashur-dan III, 7?., 231 
Ashur-etil-ilani, y)., 231 
Ashurnasirpal, p., 142, 231 
Ashur-nirari V,y>., 231 
Ashur-resh-ishi, y)., 136, 230 
Ashur-ubaiiit, y>., 231 

Asia Minor, 14, 19; see also Ana- 
tolia 

Asirsir, r., 84 


Asirum,y?., 60 

Aspandas (=Astyages), y?., 176 
Asse, c., 1 1 8 
Assyria, /.: 

conquests in Elam, 31, 68 f., 
104, 156-69, 185-211, 213 
conquests in Zagros Moun- 
tains, 3, 97 f., 104, 1 16, 136, 
138-55, 170-84 

provinces of, 141-44, 147 f., 
161, 166, 171, 174, 178, 181, 
209-11, 214 

sources for annals of, 151, 172- 
74, 197 f., 202 

Assyrian Dictionary, 12, 98, 115, 

153. 157 

Assyrian transcriptions of foicign 
names, 154, 177, 205 
Astibaras ( = Cyaxares [the king]), 
176, 218 

Astyages (Ishtumegu), y>., 176, 
216, 219-21, 224-26, 232 
Ata,y>., 143 
Atlila, c., 142 
Atrana, c., 181 
Atropatene, 218 
Atta-merra-haiki (Tata),y?., 81,229 
Attametu, y)., see Adda-hamiti etc. 
Atta Mitik, r., see Sha Atta Mitik 
Attar-kittah, y>., 98, 106 f., 230 
Attata Ekal Likrub, c., see Sha 
Attata Ekal Likrub 
Atuma Mountain, 117 
Auarparnu, y>., 153 
aura ('lord’O? 154 
Auramazda (“Wise Lord’Oj 
1545 



236 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Aurignacian man, 6 
Autaiummash, />., 26 
Awak, f., 32, 53, 57 
Awal, f., 34, 68 
A wan, c.: 

contacts with Ur III, 57 
early dynasties of, 23, 25 
kings of, 26-42, 46, 50, 228 
Awroman Mountain, 142 
Aza,/)., 150 
A. . . ,zahaya, /., 116 
Azerbaijan, /., 218 

Babylon, c.: 

Elamites in, 1 09-11, 119 
Fjrst Dynasty of, 68-93, 95 
Kassite Dynasty of, 93-1 10 
supported by Elam against 
Assyria, 158-67, 191-95 
Babylonia, L: 

Elamite invasions of, 23, 25, 39, 
59> 75. 79. 103-5, 109-11, 
1 18 f., 121, 158, 161 f., 164, 
166, 185, 191-94 

Guti invasion of, 37 f., 42-46 
Kassite invasion of, 89-95 
Babylonian Chronicle B, 157 f., 
163 f., 166-69, 185 
Badrah (ancient Der), 27, 146 

haga (“god”), ^54 
Bagbararna, 7>., 154 
Bagdatti, y?., 1 50 
Baghdad, route to, 3, 8, 109, 141 
Baha, ^ 7 ., 99 

Bait Hi (Bit Bagaia; “house of the 
god”),c., I54f. 

Balahute (Balahuta), 116, 120, 
188 


Bala-ishshan, 7?., 87, 98, 106, 229 
Balihu, c., see Sha Balihu 
Baluchistan, /., i, 9, 18 
Bananu, 187, 196 
Bane, 148 
Banunu, f., 204 
Barahshi (Marhashi), L: 
attacks Babylonia, 79 
conquests of, 23, 27-30, 33, 48, 

S[, 53 , 65, 97 
location of, 23, 47 
named in Elamite text, 34 
Barpanisch, 104 
Barton, G. A., xiii, 25, 27, 33, 58, 77 
Bar-Uli, 7)., 114 
Bashime, c.y 56 
Bashimu, c., 65, 204 
Batir Mountain, 41 
Battanu, p.y 147 
Bauer, Theo, 192, 196 
Bazi Dynasty, 137 
Bazizzu, 7)., 66 
Bebi, p., 6 i 
Belala, d., 100 f., 206 
Belesys, 7?. 215 f. 

Beliarik,7)., 55 ^ 

Bel-ibni, 7>., 192-97, 199 f., 202-4, 
206, 209 f., 214 f. 

BeUqisha, 7?., 187 
Belit-ali, d., 100 f. 

Belti, d.) 103 
Belt! a, d.j 122 
Beltu, c/., 90 
Benveniste, E., 213 
Beptar Siyan Sit, c, 121 



INDEX 


237 


BerossuSj 216, 220 
Berraberra, r., 120 
Bessitj /., 190 
Beyak, 113 

Bikni Mountain (Demavend), 149, 

Bilaiama,y)., 62, 65 
Billerbeck, A., 35, 46, 133, 141-45, 
147, 152, 161, 165 
Biris-hatri, y)., i8i 
Bisi-hadir, y?., 147 
Bisitun inscription, 171, 177, 182 
Bistan, r., 148 
Bit Abdadani, r., 147 f. 

Bit Akarnakkandi, f., 134 

Bit Arrabi, <r., 200 

Bit Bagaia r., 1 52, 154; see Bait Hi 

Bit Babe, c.y 116 

Bit Barbari, r., 117; see also Sha 
Barbari 

Bit Bazi, c.^ 134 
Bit Bull, f., 1 1 5 ; see also Hitpuli 
Bit Bunakki, c,, 146, 165, 200, 203, 
209 

'‘Bit Daiaukki,” r., 154 
Bit Etelle, r., u* 

Bit Habban, /., see Bit Hamban 
Bit Hamban, /., 135, 141, 147, 180 
Bit Hanipi, c.y 117 

Bit Hubbani (“house of cisterns”), 
117 

Bit Hulmi, c., 121 
Bit lakin, 187 

Bit Imbi, c,, 116, 161, 165, 168, 
189, 195, 198-201, 203, 210 


Bit Ishtar, c., 1 16 
Bit Ittatu (“house of Idaddu”), 
r., 1 16 

Bit Kapsi, /., 147 f. 

Bit Kari, c., 172 
Bit Karziabku, /., 133, 135 
Bit Kiiaila, 117 
Bit Kimil i\dad, r., 1 1 8 
Bit Kunzubati, c., 117 
Bit Laqipii, 117 
Bit Matimu, 117 
Bit Milshipak (“house of Meii- 
Shipak”), f., 1 17 
Bit Mugia (Bit Ulgia?), r., 1 16 
Bit Nagia, c., 1 17 
Bit Nakiru, c., 1x5; see also Nakri 

Bit Nankari (“house of carpen- 
ters”), C.y 11 J 

Bit Nappahe (“house of black- 
smiths”), c.y II 5 

Bit Nap Shumalia (“house of the 
god Shumalia”), 117 
Bit Pilantu, r., 115 
Bit Rapiqu, ^.,117 

Bit Rie Rappi (“house of the chief 
shepherd”), r., 116 
Bit Rikim Adad (“house of the 
thunder of Adad”), 1 16 f. 

Bit Rituti, c., 116 

Bit Sha^ali (Bit Sa^alli, Bit Silia), 
r., 1 17 

Bit sha Ilti (Dur Illatai), c., 1 17 
Bit Silia, c., see Bit Sha^ali 
Bit Sin-asharidu, c,, 134 
Bit Sin-iriba, f., 115 



238 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Bit Sin-ishmannij c.^ 117 
Bit Sin-shemi, c.^ 115 
Bit Tamtea, c., 117 
Bit Tarish Sharru (Bit Tasak 
Sunkik), c., 117 
Bit Tasak Sunkik, c., 1 17 
Bit Ulgia (Bit Mugia?) c., 116 
Bit Uzali.., r., 117 
Bit Zahmij c., 117 
Bit Zatti, /., 147 
Bitati (“houses”), 117 
bttum rabium, 53 
Bleichsteiner, R., ii, 14 
Boghazkoy, c.^ 26, 29, 140 
Bois^ier, A., 33, 59 
Boreas, see Buriash 
Bork, F., II, 14 f., 32, 37, 99, 169 
Botta, P. E., 1 52 
Brandenstein, W., 1 5, 26, 213 
Breasted, James Henry, ix 
Brown, G. W., 13 
Bube, r., 200 

Bubilu (Bupila), r., 199, 203 
Budge, E. A. W., 98, 136, 142 
Bunban (?), c., 28 
Bupila, f., see Bubilu 
Bur-Dada, 148 
Buriash (Boreas, Burya), 91, 

139 

Burn a-Buri ash, jp., 95 
Burna Mashhum, f., see Sha Puma 
Mashhum 

Burra Hutte, c., see Sha Burra 
Hutte 

Bur-Sin (Ur III),;?., 52--54, 228 


Bur-Sin II (Isin), />., 68 
Burya, d.^ see Buriash 
Busham, y?., 53 
Bushire (island), see Liyan 
Buxton, L. H. Dudley, 17 f. 

Cadusians, 218 

Cambyses (Kanbujiya) I, y?., 223, 
232 

Cambyses 11 , 7 )., ^ 3 ^ 

Cappadocia, 219 
Caspian Sea, i f., 139, 218 
“Caucasian” languages, 13, 19, 
35, 89, 140, 143 

“Caucasian” peoples, 91 f., 138, 
140 f., 145, 147 >i 53 f- 
“Caucasian” place-names, 114, 147 
“Caucasian” type of god, 90 
Caucasus Mountains, 2, 13, 139, 
170, 183 f. 

Chalcolithic period, 7 f. 
Chaldeans, 187, 196, 200, 210, 223 
Chedorlaomer (“Kudur-Laga- 
mar”),7)., 80 
Chiera, E., 96 
Chishpish, 7)., w Teispes 
Chithrafarna, 7)., see Shidir-parna 
Choara (Arri), 171 f., 174 
Chronicle P, 96, 105 
Cicero, 219 
Cilicia, /., 219 

Cimmerians (Gimirrai), 170-72, 
174, 178, 180, 183 f. 

Clay, A. T., 46, 89, 98, 105 
Contenau, G., 8, 217 



INDEX 


239 


Copper Age, 7 f. 

Ctesias, 154, 176, 215 f., 218, 224 C 
Cuq, E., 73 

Cyaxares (Uaksatar, Uksatar; a 
Median chieftain), 1 53, 162 f. 
Cyaxares (Uvakhshatra; king of 
Media), 176 f., 182, 213-20, 
222, 232 

Cyrus (Kurash) I,/?., 32, 204, 212, 
218, 232 

Cyrus 11^.3 vii, 32, 176, 212, 224- 
263 232 

Daban River, 156 
Daeba, c., 200 
Dagu,7)., 28 

Daiaukku,^., see Deioces 
Darayavaush,/)., see Darius 
Darband-i~Gawr (“Pagan’s Pass”), 

36 

Darius (Darayavaush), p., 4, 61, 
177,212,224, 232 
Dasht-i-Gawr (“Pagan’s plain”), 
161 

Debevoise, Neiison C., 218 
Deeters, G., 1 5 

Deioces (Daiauj^u), 151, 153, 

175-77.232 

Delitzsch, Friedrich, 14, 89, 92, 96 
Demavend Mountain, i, 149, 172 f. 
Der (modern Badrah), c.: 

attacked by Elamites, 105, 158, 
189 

Importance of, 27, 116, 133, 198 
in Agade period, 27, 29 f. 
in period of Ur III, 48, 50 
in Larsa-Isin period, 60, 64-66, 
68 


in Kassite period, 94, 97, 105 
in Assyrian period, 146, 158, 
t6i, 194 f., 198 

in Neo-Babylonian period, 220 
Derre-i-Shahr, c., 32, 165 
Dhorme, P., 23 

Di^bina (Duhupuna), f., 117, 145 
Dieulafoy, M., 17, 122 
Dilbat, if., 167 

Din Sharri, c.y 133 f., 200, 203 
Diodorus Siculus, 176, 215 f., 218 
Dixon, R. B., 18 

Diyala River (Durun, Turnat), 
29, 38, 104, 106, 1 15-19, 14U 
146, 180 

Dizfui (“Diz bridge”), 165 

Diz-Malkan, c., 165 

Diz River, see Ab-i-Diz 

Dossin, G., 53, 64 

Dravidians, 13, 18 

Drehem, c.^ 53 

Dudu, p., 25 

Duhupuna, see Di^bina 

Dumuzi, p-i 13 

Dunnu, c., 117 

Dur, if., 90 

Dur Abihara, c., see Dur Athara 
Dur Apii Sin, f., 132 
Dur Ashur, c., 142 
Dur Athara, i*., 161 
Dur Enlil, i*., 170 
Dur Kurigalzu, c., no 
Dur Sharrukin, c., no, 134 
Dur Shulgi, r., 73, 96 



240 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Dur Untash (Dur Undasi), c.y 107, 
200j 203 

DurisijT^., 153 

Durun River, see Diyala River 
Dusannij^)., 178 
Dussaud, R., 184 
Dutai tribe, 187 

Ea (Enki), d.^ 39, 73, 90 
Ea-gamil,;>., 95 
Eannatum, 7)., 24 f. 

Ea-Sunkik (nun.sunkik; “Ea is 
king”), d.y 100, 102 
Ea-garru,^., 100 
Ebarti I (of Simash),^),, 56, 228 
Ebarti II (of Simash),7>., 63, 228 
Ebarti in,7>., 69 f., 72, 81, 95, 229 
Ebeh Mountain, see Ebih Moun- 
tain 

Ebeling, E., 69, 98 
Ebih (Ebeh) Mountain, 115 f., 118, 
145; see also Jebel Hamrin 
Ecbatana (Hangmatana), c., 175, 
178, 214, 21 8 ; also Ramadan 

Edmonds, C. J., 36, 1 82 
Ekallat, c., 120 
Ekallate, 136 
Eiam, origin of name, 52 
Elam, son of Shem, 16 
Elamite language, viii, 1 1 ff. 
Elburz Mountains, i, 218 
Eli, r., 109, 120 

Eilipi, /., 141 f., 146, 149 f., 153, 
155, 161-63, 166, 180, 21 1 
E-..-luhhan, see Enbiluhhan 


Eiulumesh, 7>,, 44 
Emutbal, 75 f., 78 f. 
Enammune, 7>., 34, 36 f. 
Enbiluhhan (E-..-luhhan, En- 
bilua),7?., 56 f., 228 
Enetarzi, 7>., 25 
. , . .en-ili, c,^ 121 
Enki, d., see Ea 

Enlil, d., 30, 39, 41, 45, 90, 97, 1 15 
Enlil-nadin-ahhe, p., no, 230 
Enlil-nadin-apli, 7>., 94, 230 
Enlil-nadin-shumi, 7)., 105, 230 
Enmenbaragesi, 7)., 22 
Eparna,7)., 173 
Erbil, see Arbela 
Erridupizir, 7>., 45 
Esarhaddon, 7?., 167-70, 172, 174, 
177, 179 f., 186, 231 
Esarhaddon Chronicle, 168 f., 185 
Eshnunna (Tell Asmar), r., 58, 62, 
65, 79, 109 
Etruscans, 15 
Ethiopians in Asia, 17 
Euphrates River, 14, 119, 139 f. 
Eurafrican man, 17, 19 
Europe, 6 f . 

European Alpines, 18 
Eusebius, 216, 219 f. 

Field, Henry, 6, 8 f. 

Flandin, E. N., 152 
Forrer, E., 14, 26 f., 21 1 
Frank, C., 206 
Frankfort, H., 10, 18, 63, 65 
Friedrich, J., 14 



INDEX 


241 


Gadd, C. J.; 30 {., 33, 52, 54, 57 {., 
60.75 f., 78, 215-17 
Gambuli tribe, 186 f. 

Gandash, />., 93 
Ganhar, /., 47-49, 56, 60 
Garrod, D. A. E., 6 
Gatuduj ^.5 200 
Gautier, J.-Et, 29, 124 
Geers, F. W., ix 
Gelb, L J., ix, 33 
Genesis: 

chap* 10, 16 
chap. 14, 80 
Genouillac, H. de, 206 
Ghirshman, R., 8-10 
Gidar, 90 
Gifford, E. H., 220 
Gimil-Bau, p.y 70 
Gimii-ilishu, p., 59 f., 62 
Gimil-Sin, p., 53^56, 228 
Gimirrai, see Cimmerians 
Girnamme, p., 47, 56, 228 
Gisati (/.,* or kishshati, '‘totality' 0 > 
190 

Gisha, c,, 52 
Giziibundu, /., 145 f. 

Giziii, c., 52 
Gobryas,^., 224 
Godard, Andre, 1 84 
Grice, E. M., 65, 76 
Gudea,^., 54-56, II 5 
Gula, d,, 90 
Gulkishar, p.^ 94 
Gungunum, p.y 64-66, 68, 228 
Gunilaha, r., 28 


Gurumutak, r., 73 
Gustavs, A., 14 
Gutebum, /., 56 
Giiterbock, H.-G., 23, 36 
Guti: 

contacts with Elamites, 37, 42, 
79 

language of, 14, 35>,^38 
in Early Dynastic times, 23 
in Agade period, 29, 36, 41 f. 
Dynasty in Babylonia, 41-46, 
228 

in Kassite period, 92, 94 
in Assyrian period, 98, 104, 136, 
141 

Gutium (Gutu), /., location of, 41 ; 
see also Guti 

Hablum, p., 44 
Haiadanu, c., 198 
Haialilsi, read Haiausi 
Haiausi, r., 200 

Hakhamanish, p., see Achaemenes 
Hala, d.y 90 
Haiat tribe, 197 

Haldia,/., 144, 146, 1 50 f., 170, 219 
Haidians (Urartians), 14, 150, 222 
Hall, H. R., 17 f. 

Hallab, r., 77 
Halialla^ tribe, 186 
Halludush-Inshushinak, p., 105, 

230 

Hallushu-Inshushinak (Haiiushu, 
Hallusi), 163 f., 206, 231 
Hallutush-Inshushinak, p., read 
Hallushu-Inshushinak 
Halman, /., see lalman 



HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


242 


Haipij f.j 147 

hal risha^ /., 53 

Ha(l)tamti, /., 13, 52 

Haltemashj c.y 203 

Halule, c.j 166 f., 179 

Halys River (Kizil Irmak), 219 

Hamadan, c.: 

as Median center, 148 f., 155, 
171 f., 175, ai8 
route to, 3, 141, 1 61 
see also Ecbatana 
Hamanu, r., 200, 203, 210 
Hamazi, e., 23, 53, 56 
Hammurabi, p.: 

law code of, 109, 129 
reign of, 59, 79 f., 229 
Hanasiruka, />., 145 
Hanbate, c,y 116 
Hanigalbat, /., 103 
Hangmatana, c.y see Ecbatana 
Hanni, 7)., 159 f., 191 
Hanta, c.y see Sha Hanta 
Hantallak, c.y see Sha Hantallak 
Hapirti, /., read Ha(l)tamti 
Harap, r., 1 1 8 
Harba-Shipak, y>., 94 
Harbatu, c.y iiy 
Harbe, d.y see Hurbi 
Hardukku, p.y 1 54 
Harhar (Kar Sharrukin), c., 144, 
146, 150-52, 162 f., 178, 180,214 
Harpa. . . . , 118 

Harpagus, 175, 226 
Harper, R. F., xiii, 130, 151, 159, 
161, 163, 169, 174, 181, 185-87, 
1 91-205, 209 f. 


Harran, c., 217, 225 
Harshe, /., 47 f., 50, 53 
Hartabanu, c., 203 
hashduk (‘‘revered’’?), 82 
Hashmar Pass, 106, 146, 155 
Hatamti, see Ha(l)tamti 
Haupt, P., 173 

Hebrews in Babylonia, 207, 221-23 

Heinrich, E., 10 

Helios, d.y see Shuriash 

Helu,y)., 31, 228 

Heni, c.y 28 

Herbig, G., 15 

Herodotus, 17, 149, 175-77, ^ 19 " 
82, 213 f., 216, 219, 224-26 
Herzfeid, E., 7 f., 41, 120, 149, 
^ 173 182, 213, 218, 224 

Hibabri, p.y 29 

Hidalu, c.y 165, 168, 190, 192 f., 
203 f. 

Hidarida. . , p.y 28 
Hilik, c.y see Sha Hilik 
Hilmu, 163, 196, 209 
Hilprecht, H. V., xiii, 23, 30, 45, 

Hindu Kush Mountains, i 
Hinke, W. J., 115" 

Flishep-ratep (Hiship-rashir, Hisi- 
brasini),^)., 26-28, 31, 228 
Hishmitik, d.y 100 f. 

Hishur, p., 26, 228 
Hisibrasini, p., see Hishep-ratep 
Hita, p.y 33 f., 40, 228 
Hithite River, see Idide River 
Hitpuli (“the river Puli”), c.y 84; 
see also Bit Bull 



INDEX 


243 


Hittite boots, 152 
Hittites, 90, 140 
Hoiwarij /., see lalman 
Hommel, Fritz, 41 f. 

Hubaia, 144 
Hubamersili, 54 
Huban,^.,2i,34, 99-103, 107, 1 13, 
120-22, 128 f., 160, 164, 188, 
190, 205 

Hiiban-a^pi (Ummanappi), jj)., 188 
Huban-habua, 199 
Huban-haltash (Humba-haldashu, 
Umman-aldash, Umman-aldasi) 
167, 231 

Huban-haltash II, 167/., 188, 
192, 231 

Huban-haltash III, 1 95-211, 
231 

Huban-immena (Ummanunu, Um- 
man-menanu; “I am Hu- 
ban’s”), 157 f-j 231 
Huban-immena 11,^., 166 f., 231 
Huban-nugash I (Ummanigash; 
son of Huban-tahrah), p.^ 
1 57 1-) 163, 206, 231 
Huban-nugash II (son of Urtaki), 
p., 185, 188, 190-92, ^231 
Huban-nugash, son of Amedirra, 
198 

Huban-numena (Humban-nume- 
na; “I am Huban's”)> 98- 
100, 108, 120, 230 
Huban-shibar, 195, 200, 203 
Huban-tahrah (Umbadara), p.^ 
i57> 163, 188,206,231 
Hubbu, r., 62 
Flubshumkibi, 33 


Hudha (Hulahha ?), d.^ 90 
Hudhud River, 198; see also Hide 
River 

Hudimiri, r., 193, 204 
Hiising, Georg, xiii, n, 32, 35, 61, 
^ 9 y 9 ^y 99-103, 105, 107-13, 
117-20, 122-31, 145, 206 
Huhnuri, see Huhunuri 
Huhunuri, 28, 38, 51, 53 f., 58 
Hulahha (Hudha ?), 90 

Humba-haldashu, p.y see Huban- 
haltash 

Humban-ummena, 7?., see Huban- 
numena 

Humman, f., 84 
Humurtum, /., 37, 49 f., 54 . 

Hunnini,7>., 54 
Hupapanu, 164, 196 
Hupshan (Hupshana), /., 37 
Huradi, c., ao6 
Huratu, c., 116 
Hurbi (Harbe), d.y 34, 90, 96 
Hurbi-shenni, 7>., 96 
Hurpatila, p,y 96 f. 

Hurrian deity, 74 
Hurrian text, 26, 29 
Hurrians, 14 

Hurshitum (Tuz Khurmatli), /., 

47, 60 

Hurtum, 37, 49 

husa hitek (“choice wood”), 106 

husame (“with wood”), 106 

Hussi, f., 1 1 9, 134 

hute (“site”), 84 

Hutekuk, f., 84 



HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Huteludush-Inshushinak, _p., 114, 
130-33, 135, ^37, ^00, 230 
Huteshekin, 84 
Hutran (Uduran), 34, 113, 128, 
205 

Hutran-tepti (‘'Hutran is lord”; 

“ancestor” of Idaddu),^., 61 
Hutran-tepti (father of Adda- 
hamiti-Inshushinak), 190, 231 
Hyksosj 9I5 1 40 
Hyrcania, 174 

Hystaspes (Vishtaspa), p.^ 214, 
232 

lahzer-ili, p., 69 

I aim an (Alman, Arman, Halman, 
Holwan), 29, 40, 94, 98, 
116-19, 133, 136 
lamutbal, /., 185 
lanzu (“king”), p., 92, 143 
laprum, r., 53 
I aria, p-, 44 
larlagab, />., 44 
larlaganda, p,, 44 
larlagash, p,y 44 
lashian tribe, 196, 198 
lashubagalla (lasubigallai) tribe, 
98, 162 

lautarsKi, p.^ 148 
Ibate, p.^ 44 

Ibi-Sin, 52 f., 57-60, 228 
Ibranum, p.^ 44 

Idaddu (Idadu-Inshushinak) I, p., 
61 f., 228 

Idaddu II, p.j 58, 63-66, 228 
Idaddu-napir (“Idaddu is god”), 

p., 66 


Idaddu-temti (“Idaddu is lord”), 

p., 66 

Idide River (Flithite), 107, 203; 

see also Hudhud River 
Igi-haiki, p., 98 
Igeshaush(?), 44 
Ikki, p., 41 
Iklai, c.y see Sha Ikiai 
Ilimabakesh, p.^ 44 
Ilu-shuma, p.^ 68 f, 

Imbappa, 162 
Imbappi, igg, 201, 203 
Imbia, y>., 44 
Immashkush, jp., 29, 35 
Immiria, d., 103 
Imta, p.y see Imbia 
Inanna, d., 62-64, 73 , 71 , 97 
Inbir,^., 33 

Indabigash, /)., 193-95, 231 
Indada, p.y i6o 

India, 4, 6, 13, 17-19, 138-40, 

208 

Indian Ocean, i, 4 
Indo-Europeans, 90-92, 140 
Indo-Iranians, 3, 16, 138-55, 179 
Indra, d.y 139 ^ 

Indus River, 1 8 
Ingishu, p.y 44 

Inshushinak (Inshushnak, In- 
sushnak, Shushinak; “lord of 
Susa”), 21, 34, 38-40, 50, 58, 
62-64, 70, 73 f., 80, 82, 86, 100- 
104, 106-8, iiof., ii3f., 120- 
22, 125-31, 137, 158, 164, 188, 
190, 205, 207 

“Inshushinak-shar-ilani,” p.y 86 



INDEX 


245 


Insushnakj d.^ see Inshushinak 
Iranian names, 144!., 147!., 150, 
153 f.j 1 61, 176; see also Indo- 
Iranians 
Iranzu, 150 
Irarum, />., 44 
Irgidu, f.j 198 
Irria, c., 109 
Irtisati, 7)., 145 
Isfahan, 165, 218 
Ishar, f., 56 
Ishbi-Irra,/>., 58, 60 
Ishguzai, see Scythians 
Ishirtu sha Adad (“sanctuary of 
Adad”)>^-5 116 

Ishmekarab (Ishnikarab), 74, 
82, 108, 122 f., 131 
Ishmenni, j&.j 64 
Ishnikarab, see Ishmekarab 
Ishnikarabbat, 114, 123 
Ishpabara, 7)., 161 f.; see also 
Ashpabarra 
Ishpakaia, 7)., 171 
Ishtar, d., 39, 41, 45, 62, 133, 169, 
202 

Ishtar-Nanhundi, 7?., see Shutruk- 
Nahhunte 11 

Ishtumegu, 7>., see Astyages 
Ishum, d., 187 
Isin, c.: 

captured by Elamites, 105 
First Dynasty of, 60, 62, 64, 68, 

76, 79. 183 

Second Dynasty of, 1 19, 184 
Ituni,/)., 189 
Izertu, c., 1 81 


Jacobsen, T., 65 
Jacoby, F., 226 
Jaghati River, 145 
Janneau, Ch.-G., 53 
Jean, C.-F., 51 

Jebel Hamrin, 106, 145; see also 
Ebih Mountain 
Jehoiachin, 7)., 220-22 
Jemdet Nasr, 7, 9 f. 

Jensen, P., 41, 94, 206 
Jequier, G., 39, no, 125 f., 128, 
131, 160, 164, 167, 188 
Jeremias, A., iii 
Johns, C. H. W., 46, 21 1 
Josephus, 220 

Kabinak, r., 203 
Kadashman-Harbe, 7?., 105, 230 
KA.Di, d.^ see Sataran 
Ka-ida (“mouth of the rivers”)? 
68, 75 

Kaki, p., 147 
Kalat-i-Raza, 165 
Kal-Ruhuratir, 7)., read Tan- 
Ruhuratir 
Kamulla, 90 
Kamulla Mountain, 136 
Kanbujiya, 7?., see Cambyses 
Kaplu, r., 117 
Karda, 56 
Karibti, <r., 178 
Karind, 8, 109 
Karintash, /., 109 
Karintash (Kara-indash), 7)., 122 
Kar Kashshi, c.^ 177 f., 212 



246 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Karkhah River, 4, 32, 104, 132, 
146, 165, 189, 199!., 203 
Karne. . . . , c., 28 
Karsa, d.^ 205 

Kar Sharrukin, c.^ see Harhar 

Karst, J., 220 

Karun River, 4, 159, 165 

Karziabku, /., Bit Karziabku 

Kashan, 9 

Kashshen, /., 37, 92. 

Kashshu, d., 90 
Kashshu-nadin-ahi, 137 
Kashtariti,^., see Khshathrita 
Kashtiliash 1 , p.^ 94 
Kashtiliash II, p., 95 
Kashtiliash III,;^>., 103 f., 230 
Kashtilla Mountain, 136 
Kassites: 

deities of, 89-91, 117, 205 
history of, 37, 88-98, 103-5, 
108-10, 135, 138-41, 147, i6a, 
183, 229 

homeland of, 37, 91 f., 117, 178 
language of, 14, 89-92, 143, 154 
place-names of, 114, ii6f. 

. . . .kattar, 117 
Kazallu, 27, 30, 32, 48, 58, 68 f., 
76 f. 

Keiser, C. E., 48 f., 191 
Keith, Sir Arthur, 18 
Kel, c,, 106 
Keleshin Pass, 144 
khshathra (“kingdom**)} 154 
Khshathrita (Kashtariti, “Phra- 
ortes”), yj., 177, 179-82, 212 f., 
232 


Khurasan, /., i 
Kidin-Hutran, p.^ 104 f., 230 
Kifri, 35, 54 

Kikku-sime-temti, />., 26, 28, 228 

Kikiipataliish,^)., 29 

Kilka. . . , , r., see Sha Kilka. . . . 

Kilman, c., 178 

Kimash, A, 37, 47, 49 f., 54, 56 

Kindakarbu, d., 206 

Kindattu, 7?., 57-59, 61 f., 228 

Kindau, c., 151 f. 

King, L. W., 27, 31, 41, 59, 69, 95, 
98, 133 f., 136 £, 142 
Kinunir, r., 52 
Kiprat, r., 1 16 
Kipu, c., 131 
Kirbit, f., 185 
Kirikiri, p,^ 65 

Kiririsha, d.^ 21, 75, 99 f., 103, 108, 
III, 113, 120 f., 124, 128, 129, 
131, 190, 206 

Kirkuk, c., 29, 35, 37, 47, 54, 116, 

II8 

Kirmanshah, f., route to, 3, 8, 109, 
141, 162 

Kirsamas, d., 205 
Kir tiara, 7?., 143 ^ 

Kisari, 7?., 60 
Kish, r., 22 f., 109, 162 
Kishassu, c., see Kishesim 
Kisheshlu, 152 
Kishesim (Kishassu, Kishisa), r., 
147, 151 f., 178; see also Kish- 
shimu 

Kishshimu, r., 118; see also Kishe- 
sim 



INDEX 


247 


Kishu, r.j 1 17 
Kismar, 68 

KisseanSj 92; see also Kassites 
Kitaiij f., 1 17 
Kizii Irmak River, 2iy 
Kizra, r., 62 

Kiauber, E. G., xiv, 172, 178, 180, 
192 

Kluge, Th., n, 14 f. 

Knudtzon, J. A., xiv, 91, 168, 170, 
172, 178-80 

Konig, F. W., xiv, 32, 61, 82, 99, 
104, 107 f., no, 120-22, 128 f., 
i3Gi53.i59>^68, 175, 177,215 
Koschaker, P., 61, 135 
Kosseans, 92; see also Kassites 
kudur^ 12 

Kudur-Lagamar (Chedorlaomer), 
p., 80 

Kudur-Mabuk, 70 f., 75-78, 229 
Kudur-Nahhunte (Neo-Elamite 
king), 164-66, 231 ; cf. Kutir- 
Nahhunte 
Kudurru,/)., 188 
Kuduzulush I, _p,, 74, 78 f., 229 
Kuduzulush 83-85, 229 

Kuk-Kirwash (t&uk-Kirmesh), p.^ 
87 f., 126, 229 
Kuk-Kuma, /., 172 
Kuk-Nahhunte,^., 87, 229 
Kuk-Nashur I, p. 82-86, 126, 229 
Kuk-Nashur 11 , 7)., 85 f., 229 
Kuk-Nashur III, p.y 87, 229 
Kuk-Shimut, p.^ 64 
Kuk-tanra, p., 70 
Kullar Mountain, 1 53 


Kunduba, p.^ 27 f. 

Kupia, c.y see Sha Kupia 
Kurash,^., see Cyrus 
Kurdistan, /., 6 
Kurigalzu III, p.^ 96 f. 

Kurum, y?., 44 
Kutalla, c.y 76 
Kutha, c., 41 f., 162 
kutir^ 12 

Kutir-Huban, y?., 1 14 
Kutir-Nahhunte {sukkalmaK)^ 7)., 
78, 81 {., 127, 229 
Kutir-Nahhunte (king of Anzan 
and Susa), 59, 99, 109-14, 128, 
13O5 132? I 37 > -06, 230; r/, 
Kudur-Nahhunte 
Kutir-Shilhaha, p.^ 82 f., 229 
Kutu, c., Sha Kutu 
kufury 12 

Labashi-Marduk, 221, 232 
Lagamar (Lagamal, Lakamar), d.y 
12, III, 121 f., 128, 205 
Lagash, c., 24 f., 54, 56, 76 
Lahiru, r., 73, 198, 210, 220 
Lahrin, c., 73 
Lakamar, d.y see Lagamar 
Lalar, /., 104 
Lallari, 188 
Lampre, G., 38, 103, 125 
Landsberger, B., 33 
Langdon, S. A., 10 f., 22 f., 42-44, 
58 f., 79 f., 217, 220,225 
Lankuku, p., 88 
Larsa, r., 65, 75-77 
Larsa Dynasty, 60-69, 75~8o, 183 



HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


2.48 


Lasirab, p.^ 45 
Layardj A. H., 188 
Legrain, L., 26-28, 30 f., 33, 44, 52, 
57 75 78 

Lehmann-Haupt, C. F., 144, 146 
Lenormant, Francois, 11,^6, 65, 78 
Lewy, J., 215 
Libanugshabash, 53 
Libum, /)., 49 

Lie, A. G., 1 50 f., 1 54, 1 58, 161 
Lila-ir-tash, p.^ 82 
Lili 4 r-tash, y)., 114 
Liyan (Bushire), /., 8, ii, 26, 75, 
99, 108, III, 120 £, 130 
Loftus, W. K., 107, no, 119, 197 
Lubdu, 29, 136 
Luckenbill, D. D., xiv, 98, 153, 
157, 162-64, 166, 215 
Lugal-annadu, 45 
Lugal-anne-mundu, 23 
Lugaibanda, p,, 23 
Luhhi-ishshan (Luh-ishan), />., 26, 
28, 228 
Lullubi; 

history of, 40 f., 47 f., 92, 98, 
135 f., 141 f., 214 
language of, 14 
location of, 35, 40, 141 
Lullubium, /., 29, 35 f., 40 f., 49, 
98, 142, 182; see also Lullubi 
Luppuni, f., 106 
Luristan bronzes, 183 f. 

Lycians, 15 
Lydia, /., 219 
Lydians, 15 

McEwan, C. W., 66 

Madai (Mada), 143, 145 f., 148, 


Madaktu, r., 165 f., 168, 190 f., 
1936., 196, 198-200, 202 f., 
206, 209, 231 
Madanu, c.^ 215 

Madga (Tuz Khurmatli), c., 54, 
56, 115, 118 
Magan, 34 
Mahiii, c., 52 
Mahisi, y>., 84 
Makshia, c., 118 
Malamir, c., 72, 74, 159, 165 
Malgium, /., 79 
Mamanish, 145 
Mamassani tribe, 120 
Mamiti-arshu, 178 
Man(?), cf., 160 
Manchuria, 6 

Manda, /., 155, 216; also Um- 
man-Manda 
Mandaii, 104, 132 
Mandane, p., 224 
Mangisi, c., 191 
Manhashur, f., 84 
Manishtusu, y?., 26, 29, 30-32, 109, 
124, 129, 228 

Mannai, 142, 1.45 f., 150; see also 
Manneans, Munna 
Manneans (Minni), 144, 146, 150, 

353. 170-72, 174, 176, 178, 

180 f., 214 f., 222 
Mannua-ki-Ashur,_p., 211 
Mannu-kima-sabe, p.^ 148 
Manzat (Mazat), d.^ 108, 122, 
128 f.,131 
Mara, r., 109 
Maradda, r., 105 



INDEX 


249 


Mar-biti-apal-usur, p.j 137 
Marduk, d,^ 90, in, 132, 134 
Marduk-nadin-ahhe, />., 136, 230 
Marduk-shapik-zeri, p.^ 119, 230 
Marduk-shar-usur, />., 193 f., 209 
Marduk-shum-ibni, 186 
Marhashi, see Barahshi 
Mari, c., 57 f., 60 
Marrut (Nar Marrati?), /., 121 
Martenai tribe, 210 
Marubishti, c., 163, 211 
Maruttash (Marut), d.^ 91, 139 
marya (“heroes”)? ^39 
Mashdaiaukku, _p., 153 
Masiam-Ishtar, 7?., 60 
Matku, f., see Madga 
Maudaces ( = Deioces), 176 
Mayr, J., 189 

Mazamua (i.e., Mat Zamua), /., 
see 2iamua 

Mazat, d.^ see Manzat 
M^ Turnat (Mu Turran; “waters 
of the Turnat”), c., 38, 104, 

1 15. 145 

Mecquenem, R. de, 8~io, 50 f., 55, 
97, 123-25, 137, 207, 220 

Medes, vii, 3, i 43 - 5 S> ^63, 170-84, 
212-27; see also Madai 
Mediterranean peoples, 16 
Meekj T. J., 160 
Meiilet, A,, 213 
Meissner, Bruno, 10, 69, 98 
Mekubi, p.y 62 
Meii-Shipak, 109, 117 
me/^l ilani (“princes of the gods”), 
loi, 114 


Menuash, 7>., 146 
Meriggi, P., 15 

Merodach-Baladan (Marduk- apla- 
iddina),^)., 158, 161-63, 167 
Meskengasher, p.^ 22 f. 
Messerschmidt, L., 14, IQ4 
Mesu, /., 145 f. 

Metal Age, 7 f. 

Miki, p., 147 
Mimurashi, r., 106 
Minni, see Manneans 
Mirizir, d.^ 90 
Mishimruh, p., 99 
Mitaki, 147 
Mitanni, /., 90 f., 139 f. 

Mitatti, _p., 150 
Mitra, 139 

Morgan, J. de, 8, 41, no, 125 f., 
128, 159, 207 
Mousterians, 3, 6 

Munna, 146; see also Mannai, 
Manneans 

Murattash, 1 17, 136 
Musasina, p,^ 143 
Mushezib-Marduk,^., 165 f. 
Mutiabal, /., 76 f. 

Mu Turran, r., see Me Turnat 
Myhrman, D. V., 48 

Nabopolassar (Nabu-apal-usur), 
7>., 214-17, 232 
Nabu, 100 f. 

Nabu-bel-shumate,^., 192-94, 196, 
199-202, 204, 209 f. 
Nabu-damiq,7)., 188 
Nabu-naid, p.y 43, 219, 221, 223- 
25, 232 



250 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Nabu-naid— 'Cyrus Chronicle, 176, 
226 

Nabu-shar-aheshu, /)., 209 
Nagidda, y)., 53 
Nagitu, r., 163 
Nahal, /., 187, 196 f. 

Nahhunte (Nahiti), d.^ 21, 34, 73, 
78, 101, 113, 128, 131, 160 
Nahhunte-Utu, y>., 111, 126, 128, 
130 f. 

Nahish Harare, r., 117 
Nahiti, d., see Nahhunte 
Naid-Marduk, 167, 186 f. 

Nairi, 145 
Nakapu, c., 117 
Nakri tribe, 115, 158 
Namar, /., see Namri 
Nammahni, y?., 46 
Namri (Namar), 33, 35, 92, 
134 f., I 4 I- 44 > 153 

Nana, d., 59, in, 135, 206, 209 
Nannar, d., 59 f., 70, 81, 113 
napa (“grandson”)? 61 
Nap-bahappi-hutip-nappip, d.y 1 13 
Napi-ilhush, y>., 26, 228 
napir (“god”), 206 
Napir, i., 188 
Napir-asu, y>., 102 f., 124 
Napirshipak, d., 160 
Napir tu, d.y 206 
Naplanum, y?., 60 
Napratep, d.y 100 f. 

Napsa, d.y 206 
Naqsh-i-Rustam, 120 
Nar Marrati, /., see Sealands 


Nar Sillam (“the river of Sillam”), 
c.y 118; also Ukarsillam 
Naram-Sin, p.: 

reign of, 32-39, 228 
“Stele of Victory” of, 36, 109, 
129 

treaty of, 34 f., 90, 96 
Narute (Narite, Narude), d., 30, 
34 f., 39, 80 
Nasatya, d., 139 
Nassouhi, Essad, 29 
Natan, c., 118 
Nati, d.y 39 
Nazarum, r., 75 
Nazi-Maruttash, y?., 98, 230 
Nazit, d.y 100 f. 

Nebuchadnezzar (Nabu-kudurri- 
usur) I,y>., iiof., 1 1 5, 132-36, 
230 

Nebuchadnezzar II (Neo-Baby- 
ionian),y>., 216 f., 219-21, 232 
. . . .nedin, y>., 44 
Neolithic period, 7 
Nergal, -sf., 39, 73, 90, 135,187 
Nergal-shar-usur, y>., 221, 232 
Nergal-ushezib, y>., 164 f. 

Neshu, p.y 191 
Nibe, y>., 161 

Nicolaus of Damascus, 225 f. 

Nies, J. B., 191 
Nigimti, /., 97 
Nihavend, c., 8, 14T 
Nikdiara, y>., 143 
Nikdime,y)., 143 
Nikillagab, y>., 44 
Nikkum, 29 
Nin-egal, i., 73 



INDEX 


Ningalj d.^ 50 
Ningirsu, d.^ 25 
Ninhursag, d.^ 39, 50, 55, 124 
Ninkarak, d.^ 35 
Nin-kisalshu, j&., 51 
Ninlii, d,^ 41 
Ninurraj i., 46 
Ninurta, i., 35, 90 f., 135 
Nimettu-Marduk, 119 
Nimitti-Enlil, 119 
Nippur, c., attacked by Elamites, 
105,164,192,194 
Niripuni, 1 18 

Nisaean horses, 149, 201 ; see also 
Nishai 

Nishai (Nisaean plain), /. 148 f., 
1 71 f. 

Noldeke, A., 10 
Nordic peoples, 16-18, 91, 184 
Numushda, d., 48 
NUN.suNKiK (“Ea is king”), d., 
100, 102 

Nur-Adad, 143 
nur kiprat (“light of the World- 
Quarters”), loi 
Nusku, d., 90 
Nuzi (Nuza), c.^ 116, 118 
Nuzi documents, 89, 96, 153 

Old Persian inscriptions, viii, 61, 
154, 178, 213, 224 
Olmstead, A. T., ix, 47, 53, 55, 59, 
78, 89 > 93 ^-5 132-34, 136, 142- 
44, 146 f., 149 f., 152, 156, 158, 
161, 164, 185, 215, 221, 223 f. 
Opis, 39, 1 10, 134 
Oppert, J., 165 


251 

Oriental Institute of the Univer- 
sity of Chicago, ix f., xv f., 12, 
58, 98, 115, 218 
Otanes, y>., 224 

Padan, r., 92, 94, 103 
Pa^e, /)., 210 
Pahhaz, c., 1 58 

Pahir-ishshan, />., 98, 104, 106, 

135,230 

Pahuri, y?., 169 
Paiaukku, y)., 153 
Paleolithic period, 6 f. 

Pamir Mountains, i 
Panintimri (Pinikir ?), d., 2c6 
Paraetacene, 173 
Parashu, /., 189 

Parsa, /., 32, 142, 212-14, 218, 
223-27, 232 

Parsamash, /., see Parsumash 
Parsua (Parsuash), /., 142-46, 150 
L, 153, 166, 179, 214 
Parsumash (Parsamash, Par- 
su(m)ash), 31 f., 142, 146, 
166, 1796., 192!., 204, 212 f., 
218, 223, 232 
Parthia, 174, 21 B 
Partakka, r., 173 
Partikira, d,, 205 
Partukka, r., 173 
Paru, y>., 188 

Pasargadae, c., 31 f., 212, 224 f. 
Pateischoreis (Patush Arri), /., 
172 f.; see also Arri 
Peli, p.y 26, 228 
Penja-Ali-Dagh, 148 
Persepolis, c,y 7, 120 f., 212 



2 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


rsians (i.e., peoples of Par- 
sumash and Parsa), 31 f., 175, 
179 f., 2l2-2y 

rsian Gulf, i, 4, 11, 17, 22, 26, 
31, 99, 120, 130, 163, 166, 196 f., 
208, 225 

rsis, /., 31; see also Parsa, Par- 
sumash 

‘zard, M., 8, 75, 99 f., 102, 108, 
III, 120, 190 

^aortes,” 7)., ^79 

232; see also Khshathrita 

dilma, f., 203 

iepkorn, A. C., xv, 181, 185-91, 
193 f., 200 
ilki, 7)., 82 

illatu* 163, 196 f., 209 
inches, T. G., 14, 42, 89, 93, 96 
inikir, i., 34, 100, 102, 122, 124, 
128, 188 f,, 206 
iri-shate, 7>., 145 
izlumejT)., 204 
’lace, Victor, 17 
*Hny, 219 
^liocene Age, 2 

^oebel, Arno, ix, 21, 23, 27, 31, 
37, 44-46, 48, 52, 54, £8, 63- 
65, 79 f., 88, 178 
Myhistor, 216, 220 
Pope, A. U., 9, 184 
Pettier, E., 8, 17 

Pr&k, J. V., XV, 31, 149, 176 f., 
219, 224 
Price, I. M., 55 
Proto-Alpines, 18 

Proto-Elamite language, ii, 25, 
38 f., 125 
Protohattians, 14 


Protonegroids, 17 
Pudiu, 7)., 21 1 
Pududu, 7?., 64 
Puhia, 7>., 60 
Puhutu, r., 1 17 
Puli, /., see Hitpuli, Bit Buli 
Pumpelly, R., 8 
Puqudu tribe, 194, 220, 223 
Puma Mashhum, r., see Sha Puma 
Mashhum 
Puttimadal, p., 33 
Puzur-Inshushinak, 7)., 36-40, 42, 
46 f., 92, 123-25, 183, 228 
Puzur-Mazat, 7)., 85 
Puzur-Numushda, 7>., 58 
Puzur-Sin, 7>., 44 

Qablinu, r., 215 

Qara Dagh (“Black Mountain”), 

36 

. . . .rabum, 7)., 44 
Radanu River, 136 
Ragiba, d.^ 205 
Ramadani, r., 172 
Ram ate i a, 7)., 147, 173 
Ramuz, r., 120 

Rapiqum, r., 79; see also Bit 
Rapiqu 

Rashi, 1 16, 161, 165, 192, 198, 
200 f., 203, 209 f. 

Rawlinson, George, 176 
Rawlinson, H. W., 37, 90, 94, 132, 

134, 136 

Rayy, r., 218 
Reshu, r., 116 
Ria, d.y 133 f., 200 



INDEX 


253 


Riba, 52 
Rice, D. T., 17 
Rim-Sin, p.y 78-80, 229 
Rimush, p., 30, 39, 228 
Ripley, W. Z., 18 

Rip-Ruhuratir, p,^ read Tan-Ruhu- 
ratir 

Rishapania, /?., 99 
Ritti-Marduk, /)., 133-35 
Rost, P., 147, 158 
Rostovtzeff, M., 102 
Rowandiz, c.^ 6 
Rua Mountains, 148 
Rubat, f., 36 

ruhu 'sak (“descendant”)? 61 
Ruhuratir, d.^ 100 f., 190 

Sabini, y)., 143 
Sadarmat, y>., 33 
Sagartioi tribe, 149 
Sah, d.y 90 

Saimarreh plain, 32, 165 
Sakiz, 1 44 

Saliamu, r., 28 
Salt Desert, 172 f. 

Salum, r., 136 ^ 

Samsu-iluna, p., 93 
Sanam-Shimut, p.^ 28 
Sandu, 178 
Sapak, d., 205 
Sapard^, /., 173, 178 
Saradaush, 136 
Saratigubisin, y?., 46 
Sargon of Agade, />., 1 1, 26-30, 35, 
46, 228 

Sargon of Assyria, 116, 149-55, 
158, i6i f., 172, 176, 178 f., 231 


Sar-i-Pul, f., 41 
Sarzec, E. de, 25 
Sataran (ka.di), d.^ 48, 68, 97 
Satareshu, y>., 153 f. 

Satarpanu, y>., 1 54 
Satirai, y?., 145 

Sayce, A. H., 14, 33, 47, 54, 144 
Schaeder, H, H,, 213 
Schawe, J., 185, 204 

Scheil, V., 10 f., a6, 29, 31, 35 {., 
38-41, 43, 46 f., 49-53, 55, 
58-60, 62-64, 80-82, 

84-88, 97, 99 f., 102-4, 107-12, 
120-31, 135, 158-60, 163, 167, 
169, 188-91, 220 f. 

Schellenberg, H. C., 8 
Schnabel, P., 21 5 f. 

Scholtz, R., 48 
Schorr, M., 68 
Schott, E., 10 

Schroeder, O., 27, 104, 136, 146, 
152 

Schulz, A., 8 

Scythians (Ashkenaz, Ishguzai) : 
art of, 182-84 

control Media, 176, 180, 182- 
84, 212-14, 216, 232 
entry into Iran, 3, 170 
in Mannean land, 171 f. 
in Median army, 214, 217, 222 
Sealands (Nar Marrati): 

in Assyrian times, 167, 186 f., 
192, 194, 197 f. 
in Elamite texts, 121, 130 
in Kassite times, 94-96 
in Neo-Babylonian times, 214, 
220, 223, 225 
Second Dynasty of, 137 



254 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Seistan, /., 9 

Seliam, c., 115; see also Ukarsillam 
Semites, 16 

Semitic deities in Elam, 20, 35, 39, 
50, 100 

Sennacherib (Sin-ahe-eriba), p.j 
120, 136, 162-67, 179, 199, 231 
Seosenan, c., 36 
Sha Anpima, r,, 116 
Sha Atta Mitik, c., 120 
Sha Attata Ekal Likrub, c., 120 f. 
Sha Balihu, c.y 117 
Sha Barbari (“of wolves”)> c-i ^15; 

see also Bit Barbari 
Sha Beitia, c., 115 
Sha Burra Hutte, 1 17 
Sha Hanta, r., 116 
Sha Hantallak, c., 121 
Sha Hilik, c.^ 117 
Sha Iklai, c.^ 117 
Sha Imire (“of asses’’) j c., 115 
Sha Kattar2ah, c., 117 
Sha Kiika. 1 18 

Sha Kupia, 117 
Sha Kutu, r., 118 
Sha Marazza, c., 117 
Sha , , . . Nankari (“of .... car- 
penters”), II 5 
Sha Nishe (“of peoples”), 116 

Sha Puma Mashhum (“of the pro- 
tection of the god”), r., 1 1 6, 120 
Sha Shangibari, 117 

Sha Shilitu, <r., 115 
Sha Warad Egalli (“of the palace 
servant”), r., 116 
Shahan, i., 135 


Shahnam, r., 106 

Shala (Shalla), d., 74, 100, loi, 120, 
136 

Shalabum, p.^ 49 

Shalhuni, p., 49 

Shali, r., 106 

Shalla, d.^ see Shala 

Shailukea (Shaiulikki), /., 130, 204 

Shalmaneser III, 92, 143 f., 231 

Shalmaneser IV, 231 

Shalmaneser V, 7?., 231 

Shaiulikki, /., see Shailukea 

Shamaia, p.y 133 f. 

Shamash, d.y 20, 31, 39, 41, 62, 90 
Shamash-shum-ukin, p.y 185, 191 
f., 198 

Shamshi-Adad V, p.y 115, 117, 
145 f., 156, i66, 231 
Shamua, p.y 133 f. 

Shangibari, r., see Sha Shangibari 
Sharkalisharri, p.y 39 f., 42, 44, 
183, 228 

Sharlak, p.y 42, 44 
Sharru Iqbi, r., 170 f., 180 f. 
Sharrum-bani, p.y 53, 57 
Shashrum, /,, 49, 53 
Sha-sila, r., 104 ^ 

Shatrak, /., 116 

Shehrizor plain, 35 f., 40 f., 141 f., 
147, 150 f., 153, 162, 182 
Sheikhan, r., 41 
Shem, p.y 16 
Shenkuru, r., 1 1 5 
Shepshilak, /., 190 
Shibarru, d.y 90 

Shidir-parna (Chithrafarna, Tis- 
saphernes),/!., 173 



INDEX 


-55 


Shilhaha (Shimti [or Temti]-Shil- 
h3k),p., 70-75, 77, 81, 95, 131, 
229 

Shilhaha, “sons of a sister of,” So, 
83, 86-88, 99 f. 
Shilhak-Inshushinak I, p.: 

foundation deposits of, 50, 
1 24 f., 207 f. 

reign of, 113-31, 134, 136 h, 
145, 158, 209, 230 _ 
texts mentioning earlier rulers, 
61, 63, 69 f., 74, 79, 81 f., 
87 f., 99, 104 f., 1 1 2, 125- 
27, 129 

Shilhak-Inshushinak II (Neo- 
Elamite), p.y 167!., 180, 186, 
231 

Shilhina-hamru-Lagamar, 11 4, 
i35> ^58, 230 
Shilhite, /., 160 
Shilitu, c.j see Sha Shilitu 
Shilwan, r., 38 
Shimash, /., 51 
Shimbi-ishhuk, p., 36 
shimdi (“give”), 70 
Shimti-Shiihak, p., see Shilhaha 
Shimurrum (Altun Kopru), 33, 35, 
47-493 57 ^ 

Shimut (Shimutta, Shumudu), 

34, 73, 100, 102, 1 13, 122, 
129, 131, 205 
Shimut-nika-tash, p., 128 
Shimut-wartash, p., 74 f., 77 f., 
85, 129 

Shindilibbu, r., 64 
Shipak, d., 90, 205; also Napir- 
shipak 

Shiraz, 0., 6, 9, 1 20, 1 56 
Shirihum, /., 28, 31 


Shirtuh, p., 83, 229 
Shirukduh, p,, 74 f., 77 f., 81, 83, 
229 

Shuda, /i'-, 1 89 
Shudanu, < 7 ., 206 
Shugab, d.y 90 
Shugu, 39 
Shuhari Sungur, r., 205 
Shukshu, p., 84 

Shulgi, p., 48-5-3 553 91, 1-4 
208, 228 

Shulgi-admu, p., 55 

Shulme, p., 44 

Shuma, p., 194 

Shumahani, r., 84 

Shumalia, 90, 135 

Shumu-abi, p,, 81 

Shumudu, d., see Shimut 

Shuqamuna, d., 90 

Shuriash (Helios, Shuwar, Surya), 

9I3 139 

Shuruppak (Far a), 0., 34 
Shurutuha, /., 118 
Shushinak, d., see Insushinak 
Shushun-tarana, p., 26, 228 
Shutruk-Nahhunte I, p., 99, 102, 
105-11, 1 13, 120, 122, 128, 130, 
132, 1343 230 

Shutruk-Nahhunte II (Neo-Elam- 
ite), p., log, 131, 135, 158-63, 
206, 231 

Shutruk-Nahhunte, king of Ma- 
daktu, p., 190 
Shutruru, p., 159 f. 
Shutur-Nahhunte, p., 160 
Sidari, 0., 38 
Sidgau, p., 27 f., 30 



256 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Sikris, c,y 1 51 f. 

Silagara, 206 

Sili, i., 113 
Silli-Adadj p.y 76 
Simanum, c.^ 53 f. 

Si mash, 

in Assyrian times, 155 
kings of, 38, 47, 49, 56-66, 228 
sukkaVs of Elam and Simash, 
71-79, 81-88, 229 
Simburu, 189, 191 
Simepalarhuppak, see Siwepalar- 
huppak 

Simhuzia, p.^ 54 
Simmash-Shipak, /?., 137 
Simu-t, d.^ read Shimut 
Sin, d,, 30, 39, 41, 45 > 62, 100, 102, 

Sin-iqisham, p.^ 75 f. 

Sin-shar-ishkun, y?., 214 f., 231 

Sippar, 31, 43, 109 f., 164, 168 

Siri, £•., 52 

Sirwan, c., 38 

Sissirtu, c., 180 

Siu, c.y 52 

Siam, p., 45 

Siwepalarhuppak (Simepalarhup- 
pak),^., 74 f., 77 f., 87, 98, 106, 
229 

Smith, G. Elliot, 18 
Smith, Sidney, 27, 36, 42, 46, 97, 
162, 168, 226 
Sommer, F., 15 
Sosarmus, _p., 176 
Speiser, E. A., 14, 23, 30, 35, 42, 
142 


Spiegel, F. von, 173 
Sprengling, M., ix 
Stein, Sir Aurel, 9 
Strabo, 5, 17, 173, 218, 226 
Streck, M., 107, 1 57, 161, 163, 165, 
185 f., 188-90, 192, 195 f., 198, 
200-204, 210 f. 

Subartu peoples, 56, 65, 79 
Suhsipa, i., 108, 122 
Sulaimaniyah, r., 6, 35, 36 
Sumerian script in Elam, ii, 26 
Sumerian texts from Elam, 62 f., 
87, 126 f. 

Sumerians in Iran, 17 f. 
Sumu-abum, y)., 68 
Sumu-ilum, y)., 68 f. 

Sumu-la-ilum, y)., 69 
Sumuntunash, c., 203 
Sumurzu, 147 
Sungursara, 205 
Suqush, /., 104 
Surya, Shuriash 

Susa, c.: 

buildings at, 34, 38, 50, 62-64, 
82, 86 f., 99 f., 107, 110-12, 
121-29, 13;, 164, 167, 207-9 
business documents from, 10, 
24 f., 34, 66, 72-74, 165, 199 
conquered by foreigners, 28, 30, 
50-52, 57 . 59 , 97 , 133, 189 f-, 
200 f., 205-11, 221 
excavations at, viii, <,*"21, 95, 
123-30, I 37 > 207 
god of, 21, 120, 125-30 
kings of Anzan and Susa, 70 f., 

98-135, 157-68, 230 f. 

location of, 4 f. 



INDEX 


257 


Susa, c, — Continued 
pottery of, 8-10 
rulers of, 36, 53, 55, 58, 63, 74- 
88, i68 f., 185-211, 214, 220, 
229, 231 

Susanu (Susa ?), c.y 21 1 
Sutium, /., 79 
Syennesis, />., 219 
Synchronistic History, 98, 109, 136 
Syria, 67, 147, 151, 219, 224 f. 

ta-an^ 63 

Tab-migirshu, 122 
Tahha tribe, 159, 194, 207 
Tahhasharua tribe, 204 
Tahhihi, 75.3 159 
Tahirman, f., 106 
Takht-i-Baikis, 145 
Takkatap River, 197 
Talah, r., 203 

Talta,/)., 150, 153, 155, 161 
Taizana, r., 118 
Tamil language, 13, 18, 138 
Tammaritu, son of Huban-nugash, 
192-94, 196, 201, 206, 231 
Tammaritu, so%of Urtaki,^., 188, 
190, 231 

Tandaia, 185 
Tannanu, 162 
Tan-Ruhuratir, 58, 62 f., 228 
Tan SMam, r., 117 
Tan-Uii, 85 f., 229 
Tanus, 148 
Tarbisu, c., 215 
Tardunni, 41 


Targibatu tribe, 187 
Tarsina Mountain, 104 
Task Tepe, 146 
Tata, p,^ 26, 228 

Tata (Atta-merra-halki), 81 f., 
229 

Tavernier, L. K., 26 
Tazitta I, p.^ 49, 56, 228 
Tazitta II, p., 56, 228 
Tazzigurumash, y>., 94 
Teda, c., 106 
Teheran, c., 8, 149, 218 
Tehip-tilla, p.^ 96 
Teispes (Chishpish), p.^ 31 f., 

179 f., 204, 212 f., 232 
Tell Humbi, r., 165 
Tell Tuba (Tuba), 189, 191, 200, 
203 

Tern Sanit, p.^ 87, 229 
temtiy see tepti 
Temti, d.^ see Tepti 
Temti-agun, 81-84, 127, 229 
Temti-halki, 7)., 85 f., 229 
Temti-hisha-hanesh, 7)., 82 
Temti-raptash, 7)., 83, 85, 229 
Temti-Shilhak, 7?., see Shilhaha 
Temti-turka-tash, p.^ 114 
Tentar ( = tin.tir, “Babylon” ?), c., 
126 

tepti {temti; “lord”), 70 
Tepti (Temti), d.^ 113, 160 
Tepti-Huban-Inshushinak (Tepti- 
Huban, Te-Umman), p.^ i86~ 
91, 195, 200, 231 
Teshup (Tishup), d,^ 160 



258 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Tetep-madaj p.^ 8o 
Tettu, f., 120 

Te-Umman, see Tepti-Huban-In- 
shushinak 

Thompson, R, C., 59, 167, 171, 

173 f ., 204 

Thureau-Dangin, F., xvi, 23, 25, 
31. 33. 43 j 46, 52 {., 56, 77, 134, 
132, 154, 215, 217, 221 
Tiglathpileser (Tukulti-apil-Esh- 
arra) I, 117, 136, 230 
Tiglathpileser III, p,^ 115 h, 147, 

Tigris River, 27, 68 f., 94, 105, 1 1 5, 
118 £, 121, 158, 161, 166, 215 
Tikni, 107 
. . . .tilla, /., 1 16 
Timat-Enlil, r., 56 
Timtab, 32 
Tintu, e.^ 117 
Tintu Ili-erish, r., 117 
Tiptakzi, p., 94 
Tirigan, p., 44, 46 
Tiruji/., 1 13, 131, 160 
Tirushak, d.y 160 
Tirutir, e/., 160 
Tirutur, J,, 160 
Tishup, d., see Teshup 
Tissaphernes, p.y see Shidirparna 
Titurru (“the bridge”) j c., 116 
Toscanne, P., 208 
Transcaspian regions, 1 84 
Transcaucasian regions, 1 84 
Tseretheli, G* F., 14 
Tuba, r., see Tell Tuba 


Tukrish, /., 29 

Tukulti-Ninurta I, p., 104 230 

Tukulti-Ninurta H, p., 231 
Tunaku,^)., 147 
Tuni, 7>., 147 
Tunnati, c., 116 
Tunni, r., 115 
Turkestan, /., 3, 8, 18, 138 
Turnasuma, r., 104 
Turnat River, see Diyala River 
Tuz Khurmatli, r., 47, 54, 60, 115, 
118 

Uaksatar,^., see Cyaxares 
Ualki, 1 44 
Uaili,jJ)., 1 81 
Uba,^., 30 f., 52 
Uduran, see Hutran 
Ugugu,;>., 54 

Ukarsillam { — ugdr Sillam),. c., 
II see also Akarsallu; cf. Sel- 
1am, Nar Sillam, Tan Silam 
Ukku~tahesh, />., 26, 228 
Uknu River, 132 
Uksatar, p., see Cyaxares 
U1 , p., 27 , 

Uki River, 52, 104, 133, 163, 189, 
203 

Uiaiash, r., 104 
Ulam-Buriash, p.^ 95 
Ulan, c.y 120 
Ullusunu, p.y 1 50 f., 1 53 
Ulpuhshi-igi-balap, r,, 79 
Ulum, r., 52 

Umbadara, see Huban-tahrah 



INDEX 


259 


Umhuluma, /".j 199, 204 
Umma, c., 34, 45 f. 

Umman- . ... ,p,^ see Hiiban- .... 
Umman-aldashj see Huban- 
haitash 

Ummanigash, see Huban-nu- 
gash 

Umman-Manda (“hosts of the 
Manda”), 216 f.; see also Man- 
da 

Umman-menanu, see Huban- 
immena 

Ummanunuj p.^ see Huban-im- 
mena 

Undadu, 199, 203 
Undasi, p., see Untash 
Unger, E., 97 
Ungnad, A., 60, 84, 93 
Unpahash, read Unpatar 
Unpatar-Huban, /)., 104, 230 
Untash-. . . . (Undasi), 7)., 191 
Untash-Huban, />., 100-104, 122, 
124, 230 

Unvala, J. M., 112, 122 
Upash, 148 
Uppis,7>., 173 

Upurkupak, d.^ 100, 102, 130 f. 

Ur,^.: • 

in Early Dynastic times, 30 
Third Dynasty of, 33, 37 f., 47- 
60, 62, 64, 67, 96 f., 125, 183, 
208, 228 

in Isfin-Larsa period, 60, 68, 76 
Uraka Zabarna, r., 174 
Urartians, see Haldians 
Urbillum, /., 46, 49, 53, 56; see also 
Arbela 


Ur-ishkur, p., 53 
Urkish, /., 33 
Urkium, p., 50 

Urmia Lake, 141, 144-46, 149 f., 
166,170,179,182,214 
LV-Nammu, p., 47, 228 
Ur-Nanshe, _p., 24 
Ur-niginmu, p., 51 
Ur-Ninurta, p., 65 
Ur-Sin, 7?., 50 

Urtaki, king of Elam, 168 f., 185- 
88, 201, 231 

Urtaki, nephew of Tepti-Huban- 
Inshushinak, 189 
URU+A, C., 24, 28, 52, 55 
Uruanna (acropolis of Susa), 63 f. 
Uruaz, 24 
URU.A2, f., 24, 52 
Uruk, c.: 

in Early Dynastic times, 22 f. 
in Ur III period, 50 
in Larsa-Isin period, 79 
in Assyrian times, 164, 194, 202, 
214 

Nana of, 59, iii, 206, 209 
Uruk period, 9 f. 
Urutuk-El-halahu, 114 
Ushishi, r., 178 
Ushrai, 75., 1 54 
Ushshi, p., 94 
Ushuru, p., 148 
Utu-e-hihhi-Pinikir, p., 114 
Utug,p., 

Utuhegal, p., 43, 46 
Uvakhshatra, p., see Cyaxares 
Uzargarshana, 56 



26 o 


HISTORY OF EARLY IRAN 


Varuna, d., 139 
Virolieaud, C., 54 
Vishtaspa, p.y see Hystaspes 

Warad-Nannar, 56 
Warad-Sin, p,, 76-78, 229 
Ward, W. H., 66 
Warlagaba, p., 44 
Waterman, Leroy, xvi, 130, 151, 
159, 161, 163, 169, 174, 181, 
185-87, 1 91-205, 209 f. 

Weidner, E. F., ii, 48, 59 j ^9 
93, 98, 106,115,119, 1451., 184, 
204 

Weidner Chronicle, 36 
Weissbach, F. H., 92, 99-101, 
107 f., iiif., 1 19, 122, 131, 
160, 169, 177 

W^inckier, H., 45, 96, 105, no, 132, 

H 9 > 155 

Witzel, M,, 43 
Woolley, C. L., 18 

Xenophon, 224 

Zab River, Lower, 29, 47, 48, 104, 
109, 117, 121, 136, 142, 146, 153 
Zaban, c., 33, 73, 109, 115, 136; 
see also Altun Koprii and Shim- 
urrum 

Zabdanu, r., 198 


Zabshalu (Zabzalu), /., 54, 65, 73 
Zabum, r., 49, 52, 56 
Zabum, p.^ 76 
Zagros Mountains; 
cereals in, 8 

importance of, i, 3 f., 171 
Indo-Iranians in, 138-56, 170 jff. 
lands in, 29, 33, 35, 37, 40, 46- 
48, 53, 91 f., 98, 104, 141 f., 
178 

peoples in, 14, 19, 32, 35, 40, 
152,183 

Zahara, /., 30, 39 

Zakruti, f., 148 f.; see Sagartioi 
tribe 

Zallat, 1 17 

Zamama-shum-iddina, p., 108 f., 
230 

Zambia, />., 76 

Zamua (Mazamua), /., 141-44 
Zana Tentar (“Lady of Baby- 
lon'"?), d.^ 126 
Zanasana, 173 
Zariqum,^., 53, 55 
Zaul, ^.,52 
Zeribor Lake, 46, 144 
Zidanu, r., 64 
Zikirtu, /., 150 
Zina, p,y 28 
Zohab, f., 40 


[ PRINTED 'll 
IN USA- I
Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Texts

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

Full text of "History Of Early Iran"

See other formats
